Trump's Defense at Civil Fraud Trial Zooms In on Mar-a-Lago, With Broker Calling It 'Breathtaking'
Spanning 17 acres with waterfront on two sides, the Trump estate and social club is his home, a place where the former president and current Republican 2024 front-runner has conducted high-profile meetings while in and out of office, and the spot where federal special counsel Jack Smith alleges he improperly stashed classified documents, which Trump denies.
December 06, 2023 at 01:58 PM
5 minute read
Cases and CourtsFormer President Donald Trump's civil business fraud trial turned Tuesday to one of the topics that has vexed him most, the value of his Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida.
Testifying for Trump's defense, a Florida real estate attorney said the property could be sold as a home, notwithstanding decades-old legal documents in which Trump said he intended to forswear its use as anything but a club. Then a Palm Beach luxury real estate broker testified that he'd value the historic estate at over $1 billion as of 2021.
"It's something breathtaking. It's something amazing to see," broker Lawrence Moens said before showing a glimmering video complete with swelling music, aerial shots of the property at sunrise and sunset and a closing image of an American flag.
His testimony was punctuated by wry remarks. He described a photo of a different part of ritzy Palm Beach as showing "some land, some houses," for instance.
At one point, Moens even briefly answered a personal phone call while on the witness stand: "Dad, I love you, but I've got to get off the phone."
Spanning 17 acres (7 hectares) with waterfront on two sides, the Trump estate and social club is his home, a place where the former president and current Republican 2024 front-runner has conducted high-profile meetings while in and out of office, and the spot where federal special counsel Jack Smith alleges he improperly stashed classified documents, which Trump denies.
Mar-a-Lago also is a key element of the current New York civil case and Trump's vehement frustration with it.
State Attorney General Letitia James' lawsuit claims that the ex-president and his company deceived lenders and others by giving them financial statements that greatly overstated the values of some of his prime assets, including Mar-a-Lago.
Judge Arthur Engoron, in a pretrial ruling declaring that Trump and his company engaged in fraud, found that he exaggerated Mar-a-Lago's worth by as much as 2,300%, compared to the Palm Beach County tax appraiser's valuations. They ranged from $18 million to $28 million.
Trump denies any wrongdoing, saying that his financial statements actually undervalued his assets and were accompanied by disclaimers that wipe away liability for any mistakes.
His frequent complaints about the case have often spotlighted the claims about Mar-a-Lago, one of the holdings he called "the Mona Lisas of properties" during pretrial questioning. As recently as last Friday, Trump vented on his Truth Social platform that the judge and James "falsified the value of Mar-a-Lago."
The Palm Beach County tax assessment that the judge mentioned was based on Mar-a-Lago's annual net operating income as a club, not on its resale value as a home or on its reconstruction cost. The county uses the operating-income method to value other social clubs, and the outcome carries tax benefits for Trump, a $602,000 property tax bill this year, compared to about $18 million if Mar-a-Lago were assessed at $1 billion.
In a 2002 agreement with the National Trust for Historic Preservation, the club and Trump signed over "any and all of their rights to develop the property for any usage other than club usage."
Yet when pulling information together for Trump's annual financial statements, his former corporate controller Jeffrey McConney valued Mar-a-Lago club as though the property could be sold as a private home. The statements pegged it as high as $612 million in 2021.
James said that those values ignored the agreement with the National Trust. The attorney general, a Democrat, maintains that Trump should have valued Mar-a-Lago by its operating income, as the county does.
But Trump, in his own testimony last month, said he believes he retains the right to re-designate the property as a home. The National Trust has declined to comment on whether it agrees.
A defense witness, Miami-based real estate attorney John Shubin, testified Tuesday that "there is absolutely no prohibition on the use of Mar-a-Lago as a single-family residence."
He noted that the property is simultaneously a club and Trump's residence. Shubin also pointed to a 1993 agreement between Trump and the city that said Mar-a-Lago would revert to private residential use if the club were "abandoned."
"Anybody who buys it … would just step into the shoes of President Trump," defense attorney Christopher Kise said.
Some Palm Beach luxury real estate agents have told The Associated Press that the property would sell for $300 million to $600 million, and possibly $1 billion or more if it sparked a bidding war among uber-wealthy contenders.
So said Moens, a longtime Mar-a-Lago club member who has said he once sold another Palm Beach property on Trump's behalf.
In a pretrial report, Moens pegged Mar-a-Lago's 2021 value at more than $1 billion, saying it would be an "unparalleled" family compound for a rarefied cadre of the world's financial elite.
Asked during pretrial questioning whom he meant, Moens said he could "dream up anyone from Elon Musk to Bill Gates" and "kings, emperors, heads of state."
"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one," Moens said during cross-examination Tuesday, borrowing a line from John Lennon's song "Imagine" and hailing Trump as "a dreamer and a great American."
The trial had been due to continue Wednesday with a second round of testimony from the former president's son Eric Trump, an executive vice president at his father's company. But defense lawyers decided they didn't need to bring back the son, who's also a defendant in the case.
Instead, testimony will resume Thursday with an expert on accounting.
Jennifer Peltz reports for the Associated Press.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Courts of Appeal Conflicted Over Rule 1.442(c)(3) When Claims for Damages Involve a Husband and Wife
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250