What specific assets have New York authorities filed judgments against in the Trump civil fraud case?
Executive summary
New York secured a civil judgment against Donald J. Trump and related defendants ordering them to pay hundreds of millions of dollars — a monetary judgment the state has said it will enforce against Trump’s property if he does not post bond or otherwise satisfy the debt — but the publicly available reporting summarized here does not show a definitive, itemized list of specific Trump-owned properties already seized or explicitly encumbered by judgment liens [1] [2] [3]. Attorney General Letitia James has publicly warned she will pursue seizure of assets and has pointed to specific New York properties as obvious collection targets, but her office has not in these reports enumerated a formal list of parcels turned over to the state [4] [3].
1. What the courts actually entered: large monetary judgments, not a roll‑call of properties
The court rulings described in the reporting produced a monetary obligation — reported variably as roughly $354 million in some stories and as more than $450 million (with figures near $454–$465 million in others) depending on counting methods, interest, and later enforcement actions — rather than an immediate inventory of physical assets taken by the state [5] [1] [2] [3]. Attorney General James’ press statement summarized relief ordered by Justice Engoron, including disgorgement and pre‑judgment interest totaling “more than $450 million” [1], while contemporaneous news outlets reported the judgment as roughly $454 million and noted it accrues daily interest [3] [2].
2. Threats and public signaling: James names a Manhattan building as an obvious target
When asked about enforcement, AG James signaled the office would use ordinary judgment‑collection tools and said she looks at 40 Wall Street “each and every day,” explicitly identifying that Trump‑owned Manhattan office tower as a potential seizure target if the judgment went unpaid, though she did not state that the state had already filed a judgment lien against that or any other named asset in the cited coverage [4] [3]. Reporting emphasizes the AG’s readiness to seek court permission to seize assets but also makes clear that naming a property in public comments is different from the legal mechanics of recording liens or seizing title — which the articles do not document as having already occurred [4] [3].
3. Temporary stays, bonds and the practical limits on seizure
An appeals court agreed to pause collection while Trump pursues appeal on condition he post security — news coverage described a $175 million bond or equivalent that would forestall active seizure — demonstrating the common situation in high‑stakes civil cases where enforcement is often stayed pending appeal and where the state’s listed remedies remain contingent rather than consummated seizures [2]. The PBS and other reporting explained that the appeals court held off on collection if Trump put up $175 million within a short deadline, indicating the judgment exists but active property takedown was deferred by the bond agreement [2].
4. What the reporting does not show: no public record here of specific, filed judgment liens against particular properties
The assembled sources document the existence and size of the money judgment, the AG’s public intent to seek asset seizure if necessary, and a specific public reference to 40 Wall Street as an obvious target, but they do not, in the materials provided, show a recorded list of specific real‑property parcels or bank accounts that New York has already legally seized or placed under lien to satisfy the judgment [1] [4] [2] [3]. If the state has filed formal judgment liens, levies, or other enforcement instruments against particular properties beyond public statements, that action is not documented in the cited reporting and therefore cannot be asserted here.
5. Bottom line and competing narratives
The verifiable fact in the sources is that New York won a large monetary civil judgment and has publicly warned it will use judicial enforcement tools to seize assets if payment is not made or secured, with AG James calling out 40 Wall Street as an obvious potential target; beyond that, these reports do not furnish an itemized list of specific assets already encumbered or seized by the state [1] [4] [2] [3]. Different outlets report slightly different judgment totals and subsequent appellate outcomes or stays, and those numerical divergences and procedural nuances explain why some reports emphasize $354 million while others cite roughly $454–$465 million; readers should treat public statements about potential seizures separately from recorded enforcement filings, which are not shown in these sources [5] [1] [2] [3].