No, the argument was over whether Trump accurately valued his real estate that was collateral for a loan or not. The banks involved testified they did their own due diligence and were satisfied with the collateral and terms of the loan that was paid back in full.
The judge--having ZERO real estate experience--arbitrarily said he found Trump had overestimated the value of the real estate. He then slapped a half-a-billion judgement on Trump even though there was no loss to any party involved.
In a civil suit you cannot enrich anyone beyond making them whole for any loss. There were no losses, so there was no rational means to award a judgement against Trump for anything.
It is YOU that doesn't get it.
My bet is that there is far more of a real case against James than Trump. She repeatedly--not just once, but repeatedly--lied on forms to get a government backed mortgage at better terms. The paperwork stated right on it that lying was subject to penalty under law.
Fraud is a criminal case. Trump was tried civilly by James. You obviously don't grasp the difference. There was no "guilty" verdict. In a civil trial, the judgement is to award one party for damages to make them whole. No loss, no judgement against.
James and Eragon were out to get Trump and did so, at least temporarily. With the judgement against Trump thrown out anything remaining is moot since it's a civil case.
Now get the nurse to change your Depends before you get another nasty rash.
