Does the judge or Letitia James have any options on todays ruling?

[bluestarone]

I mean it seems like TFG has every option, (including waiting 10 days and then appeal this ruling too) Hell the judge KNOWS the case, so why can't HE appeal this NOW?

[Ocelot II]

1. Judges can't appeal anything; only the parties to a lawsuit can appeal.

Has James objected to the decision? Consider that if he is able to obtain a bond for the lesser amount, the state of NY is completely assured of at least that money right away if his appeal fails, which is likely. He's still on the hook for the entire judgment, regardless, and the interest keeps accruing every day.

[bluestarone]

2. Question.

Could TFG wait 10 days THEN appeal THIS ruling? (which i'm thinking that is his plan anyhow)

[Ocelot II]

3. I believe he has already filed a notice of appeal for the trial itself.

No as to appealing the same issue (the bond) again. But why would he appeal a decision in his favor? He got some of what he wanted, at least temporarily.

[bluestarone]

4. Only ONE reason i can think of

DELAY. Always DELAY.

[Ocelot II]

5. He can't appeal regarding an issue previously decided.

[bluestarone]

6. Not to the NY SC?

I mean if Delay was his plan? He was given 10 days to pay the lesser amount, but if delay was his game plan i thought he could then appeal to the NY Supreme court?

[Ocelot II]

7. Delay doesn't serve him well in this case because the interest on the judgment

is accruing rapidly. Right now it's $111,000 per day, regardless of what else happens in the meantime. Every nine days the interest increases by $1M. It will continue to accrue until he pays off the entire judgment.

[bluestarone]

8. Oh, i definitely see that. (maybe, TFG is thinking the USSC will save his ass, i don't know)

The problem i have is, WHY have a NY state law that says ONE THING and appeals court goes against it. The Judge called for the $464 million bond. If Letitia could appeal, why don't she. TFG will anyhow. (10 days from now) I looked up the judges here, and i believe they are good judges, BUT why overturn this? I just do not get their reasoning.

[Ocelot II]

9. Courts have some discretion in these matters.

They might have concluded that it made more sense (and actually provided more protection for the state) to permit the smaller bond than proceed with no bond at all, which would leave the state to the considerable expense and delay resulting from having to litigate the extent and priorities of the various liens would have placed on the properties. And they would have to do exactly that because so many of Trump's properties have mortgages, co-owners, and other encumbrances. If he has the money for the smaller bond it's a fund that would be available after the appeals are concluded without all those complications. He's not off the hook, and the interest is accumulating.