Judge Engoron has set a date of Jan. 11 for closing arguments in the trial.

Both parties face a noon deadline on Jan. 5 to file their briefs, and closing arguments are scheduled to take place in person on Jan. 11, the judge decided after considering scheduling proposals from both the state and the defense.

Engoron said he plans to issue his decision in the case "a few weeks after" closing arguments.

"I would hope this [January] but no guarantees," Engoron said.

State attorneys had requested closing statements take place Dec. 13, while attorneys for Donald Trump suggested closing arguments be presented 60 days after both parties submitted paper filings.

Judge Arthur Engoron warned that he plans to "rigorously" enforce the limited gag order he handed down last month, which prohibits Trump and his attorneys from commenting on the judge's staff, after an appeals court reinstated it this morning.

"I want to make sure all counsel are aware, and they probably already are aware, that this morning the Appellate Division First Department issued a decision vacating the stay on the two gag orders that I imposed earlier on this case," Engoron said in court. "So I intend to enforce the gag orders rigorously and vigorously, and I want to make sure that counsel informs their clients of the fact that the stay was vacated."

"We're aware. It's a tragic day for the rule of law, but we are aware," Kise responded.

"It is what it is," Engoron quipped.

A New York appellate court has upheld the limited gag order imposed by Judge Engoron in the ongoing trial.

The decision reinstates the limited gag order Engoron imposed on Trump and his attorneys prohibiting them from disparaging court staff, particularly his principle law clerk, who has come under attack by Trump on social media.

The limited gag order was temporarily lifted two weeks ago by appellate judge after Trump's lawyers sued Judge Engoron.

Engoron's lawyer wrote in support of the gag order, saying that Engoron and his clerk have been inundated with threats since Trump began his attacks.

"It is ordered that the motion is denied; the interim relief granted by order of a Justice of this Court, dated November 16, 2023, is hereby vacated," the appellate court said in its ruling issued this morning.

Closing statements in the trial aren't likely to occur until January, according to an updated schedule proposed by Judge Engoron.

The trial was initially expected to wrap up in December.

Rather than have the closing arguments immediately follow the conclusion of the defense's case and a brief rebuttal case by the state, Engoron signaled that he would prefer to receive simultaneous paper briefings from both parties, followed by oral arguments in January.

He did not set a date for the closing statements or oral arguments.

State attorney Kevin Wallace initially requested that Engoron set closing statements for Dec. 13. Donald Trump is set to testify on Dec. 11, and Wallace said the state may to present a brief rebuttal case, including testimony from two witnesses, on Dec. 12.

However defense attorneys suggested that both parties submit paper filings simultaneously, then receive questions from the judge and present oral arguments in 60 days.

"There is just an awful lot of argument to cover," said Trump attorney Chris Kise.

Wallace objected to defense's proposed plan "stretching this out to February," and instead suggested a two-week period after the close of evidence.

"I like the idea of the briefs, then the argument," Engoron said, adding that he would set a "just right" date between the two proposed options.

Taking the witness stand as an expert witness for the defense, accountant Jason Flemmons offered testimony in support of Donald Trump's approach to valuing his Mar-a-Lago property, which has been the subject of debate throughout the seven weeks of the trial.

In his summary judgment decision, Judge Engoron found that Trump overvalued the estate by at least 2,300% because the Palm Beach County Assessor appraised the property's market value between $18 and $27.6 million after Trump signed a deed that restricted its use to a social club, potentially limiting its resale value as a residence but ensuring a tax cut. Trump, in contrast, listed its value in his financial statement between $426 million and $612 million, and during his appearances in court and online he has repeatedly attacked Engoron's finding.

Flemmons argued that Trump's approach to valuing his assets gave him latitude to consider his property's future revenue streams. That approach, according to Flemmons, could result in "wildly different values" between the numbers listed on a personal financial statement and a tax assessed value.

"Tax assessed values are typically on the lower end of the spectrum," Flemmons said, while Engoron looked on attentively.

While he never mentioned Mar-a-Lago by name, Flemmons was asked by defense attorney Jesus Suarez about a hypothetical property assessed at $18 million but valued closer to $500 million using a comparable sales approach -- the same approach used to value Mar-a-Lago.

"It would not be unusual to have a value in the hundreds of million using projected cash receipts," Flemmons said.

Engoron then turned his chair toward Flemmons and began asking his own questions.

"I am trying to get to the order of magnitude we are talking about here," Engoron said. "What is the highest value you have ever seen legitimately placed on such a property?"

Flemmons could not provide a specific example to answer Engoron's question but reiterated that a massive discrepancy could be appropriate.