Former President Donald Trump’s legal team recently raised critical concerns in the civil lawsuit nearly costing him $464 million. In a letter to the New York Supreme Court, they claim Letitia James, the Attorney General, failed to comply with an order to detail her office’s preservation practices related to evidence.
Trump’s attorneys argue that James might possess undisclosed key evidence, specifically communications with Michael Cohen, Trump’s former attorney. In the ongoing legal conflicts, Cohen authored an article suggesting pressure from James’s office to provide information detrimental to Trump. During the trial, Cohen was pivotal, asserting that Trump inflated his property values for personal gain.
The court denied further discovery requests from Trump’s team but mandated James’s office to disclose its practices for preserving information. Trump’s lawyers continue to assert James’s office inadequately responded to this request.
“[New York Attorney General’s Office] also carefully avoids representing one way or the other whether any requested materials in fact exist,” Trump’s attorneys noted in their filing.
Initially, James accused Trump in 2022 of consistently inflating property values fraudulently. The court ordered Trump to pay $355 million plus interest in disgorgement and issued bans restricting his financial and corporate engagements in New York for two years. While these penalties were later vacated, James aims to reinstate them.
Trump’s lawyers outlined five critical flaws in the case. They argue that James lacked authority since the case involved private transactions without public harm. Trump’s valuations were subjective, assessed and accepted independently by lenders, they say.
The prosecution viewed deviations from real estate values as potential fraud, but Trump’s team argues this interpretation could broadly allow second-guessing of any business dealings. They also claim the disgorgement penalty of $450 million is excessive and unconstitutional.
Finally, Trump’s legal team contends the case’s political motivations should nullify its validity.
James’s office, in response, asserts compliance with disclosure requirements, referencing a letter stating its fulfillment of court orders in preserving evidence.
The Trump Team’s Challenge to the Military Leadership 
Maryland First State to Restrict Electronic Pricing in Grocery Stores 
Activists Push for Nationwide Ban on Child Marriage in the U.S. 
Democratic Hopes and Historical Warnings in 2026 Senate Race 
Republicans Face Challenges Amidst Cost of Living Concerns 
A Different Kind of Fall for Congress This Year