Judge Arthur Engoron fired back at defense lawyers Thursday regarding former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg, who was allegedly engaged in plea talks with the Manhattan DA's office to resolve a potential perjury charge.

Engoron had asked the lawyers in the case for information on Weisselberg's potential guilty plea, based on reporting from The New York Times. One of the defense lawyers responded by characterizing the request as "unprecedented, inappropriate, and troubling."

"Arguing against judicial notice is attacking a straw person, as I have not taken, do not plan to take, and did not suggest or hint that I would take judicial notice of the subject New York Times article or the contents thereof," Engoron wrote in an email posted to the court's docket.

However, Engoron vowed that he would research and consider the issue if Weisselberg, a defendant in the fraud case, pleads guilty to perjury before Engoron issues his final ruling in the case.

"I am not reopening the case, but if someone pleads guilty to committing perjury in a case over which I am presiding, I want to know about it," Engoron said, adding that he reached out to Weisselberg's attorney for more information.

"You and your co-counsel have been questioning my impartiality since the early days of this case, presumably because I sometimes rule against your clients," Engoron wrote. "That whole approach is getting old."

Citing their ethical obligations, lawyers for the defendants in Donald Trump's civil fraud trial declined to provide details about "rumors of any kind" involving former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg and urged Judge Arthur Engoron to make a decision solely based on the evidence presented at trial, after Engoron asked them to weigh in on public reports that Weisselberg was engaged in plea talks with the Manhattan DA's office to resolve a potential perjury charge.

In a letter submitted to Judge Engoron Wednesday, defense attorney Clifford Robert urged the judge to strictly consider the record from the trial in his final decision, describing his request to provide information about Weisselberg based on a New York Times article "unprecedented, inappropriate and troubling."

"The Article simply does not provide any principled basis for the Court to reopen the record or question the veracity of Mr. Weisselberg's testimony in this case. Indeed, we respectfully submit that the Court's request for comment on this speculative media account is unprecedented, inappropriate, and troubling," Robert wrote.

In a separate letter, Alina Habba -- who represents Weisselberg in the civil case but is not his criminal defense lawyer -- declined to provide any information about the potential perjury and argued that no further action was needed on the matter.

"The New York Times article is neither admissible nor reliable, and it should not be considered in Your Honor's determination as to the merits of this case," Habba wrote. "We urge you to render your decision based solely on the evidence now before you."

"Court decisions are supposed to be made based on the evidence at trial, not on media speculation," defense attorney Chris Kise said in a statement.

New York Attorney General Letitia James said on Wednesday that the potential perjury-related guilty plea of former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg should have no bearing on the outcome the civil fraud case against former President Trump.

The attorney's general's office said it is unaware whether Weisselberg committed perjury while testifying in the case, but does not believe "this development should result in any delay of a final decision."

Judge Arthur Engoron had asked the parties to weigh in after it was publicly reported that Weisselberg was engaged in plea talks with the Manhattan district attorney's office to resolve a potential perjury charge.

"In sum, the fact that a defendant who lacks credibility and has already been to prison for falsifying business documents may have also perjured himself in this proceeding or the preceding investigation is hardly surprising," the AG's office said in a filing Wednesday, adding that "it should not delay a final decision and judgment imposing remedial measures in this law enforcement proceeding."

Weisselberg testified during the trial that he was only peripherally involved in certifying the size of Trump's Fifth Avenue apartment, but on the witness stand he was confronted with email suggesting otherwise.

Judge Arthur Engoron is requesting more information about potential perjury committed by defendant Allen Weisselberg, the former Trump Organization CFO, according to an email shared on the court's docket.

As ABC News has reported, Weisselberg is in plea talks with the Manhattan district attorney's office to resolve a potential perjury charge, according to sources familiar with the matter.

"As the presiding magistrate, the trier of fact, and the judge of credibility, I of course want to know whether Mr. Weisselberg is now changing his tune, and whether he is admitting he lied under oath in my courtroom at this trial," Engoron wrote in an email he sent to the parties on Monday.

Engoron requested both parties to send him a letter by Wednesday at 5 p.m. ET detailing "anything you know about this that would not violate any of your professional ethics or obligations."

"I would also appreciate knowing how you think I should address this matter, if at all, including the timing of the final decision," Engoron added.

The judge is still weighing his decision in the $370 million fraud case, which he originally indicated would come by the end of January.