I have a number of questions that I was hoping someone who agrees with the ruling could answer without any name calling.
1. How often has a state sued an individual in civil court?
2. Why was the judge allowed to use such an outrageously low appraisal of the property? I mention in a previous thread, just going by average sq. ft. And acreage values, the property is worth at least $350M. Trump said it was worth $750M and the judge said it was worth $18M. Which claim is closer to the truth?
3. Is it common for a judge to make a ruling on a case without any input from the defendant? I know this is a civil case, but shouldn't everyone get their day in court? From what I understand the judge made his ruling solely on the information provided to him by the DA. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
4. How was the $364M award calculated? Was it compensatory or punitive? Has any individual ever been sued for this amount of money before?
5. Who was the damaged party? As Has been repeated ad nauseam, the banks don't just take someone's word for the value of collateral, so who was harmed?
I am very interested to hear some answers on the above, as hopefully I can learn something.
1. How often has a state sued an individual in civil court?
2. Why was the judge allowed to use such an outrageously low appraisal of the property? I mention in a previous thread, just going by average sq. ft. And acreage values, the property is worth at least $350M. Trump said it was worth $750M and the judge said it was worth $18M. Which claim is closer to the truth?
3. Is it common for a judge to make a ruling on a case without any input from the defendant? I know this is a civil case, but shouldn't everyone get their day in court? From what I understand the judge made his ruling solely on the information provided to him by the DA. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
4. How was the $364M award calculated? Was it compensatory or punitive? Has any individual ever been sued for this amount of money before?
5. Who was the damaged party? As Has been repeated ad nauseam, the banks don't just take someone's word for the value of collateral, so who was harmed?
I am very interested to hear some answers on the above, as hopefully I can learn something.
