Only 15 minutes into what is expected to be a three-hour cross-examination, Judge Arthur Engoron snapped at defense lawyer Jesus Suarez for asking redundant questions.

"I see why this is going to take two or three hours. Some questions become three or four more questions," Engoron said, interrupting the cross-examination to request that Suarez shorten his questions.

That prompted Trump lawyer Chris Kise to criticize Engoron for placing an unfair standard on the defense team.

"You never give them speeches. You never limit their questions," Kise said about Engoron's approach to the attorney general's legal team. "I think it's unfair."

Kise stressed that the cross-examination of the state's sole expert witness is particularly important since his testimony is likely to play into the judge's calculation of Trump's potential fine.

"This witness is the only witness they have that even hints ... about ill-gotten gains," Kise said.

Engoron, however, refused to back down.

"I stand by my rulings and statements," the judge said.

Defense attorney Jesus Suarez began what is expected to be a marathon cross examination of the state's expert witness, Michiel McCarty, by attempting to use his words against him.

"Historically banks have been willing to lend to high-net-worth individuals at low rates because they get repaid?" Suarez said, citing McCarty's direct examination.

"That is correct," McCarty said.

Suarez then reminded McCarty that Trump's loans were paid on time -- a point that the former president has reiterated during his appearance in court and on social media.

Suarez then asked if McCarty had charged the attorney general's office $950 per hour for his expert analysis.

"That's my standard rate, yes," said McCarty, who estimated that his total bill for his analysis was $350,000.

The state's expert witness, Michiel McCarty, calculated that Donald Trump's lenders lost $168 million in potential interest between 2014 and 2023, according to a report he presented in court.

McCarty's testimony appeared to reinforce a central tenet of New York Attorney General Letitia James' case: that Trump's misrepresentations in his financial statements cost banks potential earnings from interest, even if the banks made money on the loans.

State attorney Kevin Wallace directed McCarty to a footnote in Judge Engoron's earlier summary judgment order about the concept of lost interest, in which Engoron said, "The subject loans made the banks lots of money; but the fraudulent SFCs [Statements of Financial Condition] cost the banks lots of money. The less collateral for a loan, the riskier it is, and a first principle of loan accounting is that as risk rises, so do interest rates. Thus, accurate SFCs would have allowed the lenders to make even more money than they did."

McCarty, who said he agreed with this assessment, ultimately found that banks lost a total of $168,040,168 in potential interest from loans related to four of Trump's properties in Miami, New York, Chicago, and Washington, D.C.

Trump attorney Chris Kise fiercely objected, arguing that McCarty was testifying about facts not established during the trial. During questioning, state attorneys declined to ask a Deutsche Bank executive if the bank would have still done business with Trump had they known his financial statements were inflated.

"They are not ill-gotten gains if the bank does not testify it would have done it differently," Kise said.

"I decided these were ill-gotten," the Judge Engoron replied.

Following Wallace's direct examination of McCarty, defense attorney Jesus Suarez began his cross-examination.

Listing companies like Marriott, Fannie Mae and AT&T, the New York attorney general's lone expert witness, Michiel McCarty, began his testimony by outlining some of the deals he worked on during his nearly 50-year career.

McCarty said that he has worked as an expert witness on "dozens of cases" and testified at 15 trials. But he acknowledged that he had limited experience with the compilation of statements of financial condition, prompting an objection from Trump's lawyer Chris Kise.

"It appears that he does not have the specific experience relevant to the purpose he is here," Kise argued.

Deemed an expert by Judge Engoron, McCarty went on to explain the report he wrote after reviewing Trump's finances.

Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago Club was worth more than $1.2 billion in 2021 -- roughly double the value listed in Trump's statement of financial condition -- according to defense expert Lawrence Moens.

Describing Mar-a-Lago as a castle nestled on 17.6 acres of waterfront property, Moens said he determined the value by considering nearby properties and adding the total value of the club's 500 memberships, which in 2021 cost $350,000 each.

Between 2011 and 2021, Moens' analysis found that Trump undervalued Mar-a-Lago in his statements of financial condition -- but his analysis appeared to be based on Trump being able to sell the property to an individual to use it as a private residence, which the New York attorney general says Trump is prohibited from doing based on a 2002 deed he signed that would "forever extinguish their right to develop or use the Property for any purpose other than club use."

Judge Engoron only qualified Moens as an expert on the value of residential real estate.

Moens spoke with confidence about his ability to value real estate in Palm Beach, saying that he has sold billions of dollars of real estate since his first sale as a broker in 1982. Asked if any broker has sold more Palm Beach real estate than he has, Moens replied, "They don't exist."

"I am on the front lines everyday of selling properties, and I have a pretty good handle of what is going on currently in the market," Moens said. He later added, "My numbers are usually right."

Moens also put together a seven-minute promotional video about Mar-a-Lago, which was played during his testimony. Set to relaxing music, the video included high-resolution drone shots and dramatic panning shots of the property's amenities. After the video played, Moens highlighted details such as hand-carved stones, gold decorations that cost millions to construct, and other details that required years of work from tradesmen.

"I invited the attorney general's office to come see it anytime. The offer still stands," Moens said. "I will make sure he is not there when you come," he said of Trump.

Engoron appeared attentive to Moen's testimony -- but once Moens left the courtroom, he indicated that he wasn't as concerned about Mar-a-Lago's specific value as he was about whether it was misrepresented.

"I see this case about the documents -- whether the defendants used false documents when transacting business," Engoron said. "I am not trying to figure out what the value is ... I don't necessarily consider it relevant."