re: #84 Targetpractice

It’ll be sold as that happy “middle ground” we’re always told that we should aspire towards: It avoids letting him entirely off the hook by granting a stay, but also allows them to wag their finger at James for imposing “hardship” on Trump by insisting he cover the entire ruling with either a bond or cash before they’ve had a chance to weigh in on said ruling. Why? Because he’s a rich guy and there’s all sorts of people who depend upon him keeping the doors open and the lights on, so the city should be a little more understanding when he says that his only option to get the money is to sell his properties unless the court intercedes.

they aren’t doing that. there are zero technical grounds for the appellate court to do any favors for Trump. I am not a lawyer, but on ex ante grounds, it would be suicidal for the appellate court to provide Trump relief. They would be opening the door to have every single judgement appealed on the grounds that paying what a jury says to pay is creating a hardship on the defendant. Of course it’s creating a hardship on the defendant. So is being sent to prison for 20 years, but ordinarily you don’t get to appeal on the grounds that doing 20 years seems like a hardship, unless something happened in the trial or the judgement that suggests something went badly wrong, and that didn’t happen here.