Eric Trump personally pushed for a higher valuation for 71 undeveloped residential units at the Trump National Golf Club in Westchester County outside New York City, a real estate executive testified.

David McArdle of the real estate firm Cushman & Wakefield said he was hired to appraise the future value of the duplex units to be built along the golf course's 18th hole fairway. McArdle said he personally worked with Trump Organization VP Eric Trump on the project in 2013.

"Eric loved this project. He thought it was very special," McArdle said.

When McArdle eyed a value between $40-$45 million, Eric Trump pushed for a higher value, McArdle said.

In an email that was entered into evidence, McArdle wrote to a colleague regarding Eric Trump: "He continues to call me. I am uncomfortable not replying, please call him."

McArdle testified that he wanted to be "respectful" to Eric Trump, who he hoped to work with on future projects; however, McArdle said he and Eric Trump continued to disagree about the value of the undeveloped units.

"Eric had certain ideas about value. They may have been more lofty than $45 million," McArdle testified.

McArdle said was firm on the $45 million valuation, adding that he did not want to put "Eric in a vulnerable position" because the appraisal could be "under a lot of scrutiny by the IRS or a court."

"We were sort of at the end, and anything beyond $45 million would have put people at risk," he said.

When Ladder Capital executive Jack Weisselberg worked on a $160 million loan for the Trump Organization, he partially relied on Donald Trump's financial statements, according to his testimony this morning.

"The liquidity was really what we were paying attention to," said Jack Weisselberg in reference to the $302 million in cash and marketable assets Trump claimed in his 2014 statement of financial condition.

Pressed on direct examination, Jack Weisselberg declined to say he fully relied on the statement, which the New York attorney general alleges was fraudulently inflated.

"The net worth was one of many statements we were looking at in the underwriting process. It was a factor," Jack Weisselberg said.

He stepped down from the witness stand at the conclusion of questioning, though defense counsel reserved the right to call him back during their case.

Lawyers for former President Trump and New York AG Letitia James began court with a 25-minute private sidebar discussion with Judge Arthur Engoron.

Earlier the attorney general's office requested a forensic examination of Trump Organization data after identifying what they said were "likely omissions" of emails related to former CFO Allen Weisselberg.

"Excuse me, be more respectful," state attorney Colleen Faherty audibly said during one point of the heated sidebar.

"No," Trump attorney Chris Kise responded.

New York Attorney General Letitia James is requesting a forensic review of Trump Organization electronic data after identifying a missing set of emails between former CFO Allen Weisselberg and a real estate executive.

"The failure to produce these later emails indicates a breakdown somewhere in the process of preserving, collecting, reviewing and producing documents," state attorney Kevin Wallace wrote in a letter to Judge Arthur Engoron.

The request follows an accusation from Forbes Magazine, reported in a story last week, that Weisselberg committed perjury on the stand, based on "old emails and notes, some of which the attorney general's office does not possess." Despite Weisselberg testifying that he "never focused on the apartment," the Forbes story said that he "played a key role in trying to convince Forbes over the course of several years that it was worth more than it really was."

The letter from the attorney general appears to focus on an email exchange related to the value of Trump's golf courses, rather than the value of his Trump Tower penthouse at the center of the Forbes accusations.

"We would therefore propose that the Monitor undertake a forensic examination of electronic data held by the Trump Organization for the very brief period August to September of 2016 to determine if all responsive information has been produced," Wallace wrote.

While Weisselberg's testimony concluded last Thursday, both parties have reserved the right to call the former Trump Organization CFO back to the stand.

An attorney for Judge Arthur Engoron also filed in support of the gag order in Donald Trump's civil fraud trial, arguing that violent threats have increased since the gag order was lifted.

The limited gag order, which prohibited Donald Trump and his attorneys from publicly commenting about Engoron's staff, was issued by the judge last month after Trump posted about the judge's law clerk on social media. Judge David Friedman of the appellate division's First Department stayed the order on Thursday, citing constitutional concerns over Trump's free speech rights.

Engoron's filing includes a report from Charles Hollon of the Judicial Threats Assessment Unit of the New York State Court System's Department of Public Safety. According to the report, Engoron and his principal law clerk, Allison Greenfield, have been inundated with credible, violent and antisemitic threats since Trump began criticizing Greenfield.

"The threats against Justice Engoron and Ms. Greenfield are considered to be serious and credible and not hypothetical or speculative," Hollon wrote in the report.

Greenfield has been the victim of daily doxing of her personal email address and phone number, receiving dozens of calls, emails and social media messages daily, according to Hollon. Approximately half the harassing messages have been antisemitic, according to Greenfield.

In the report, Hollon wrote that Engoron was the subject of credible threats before the trial had started, but Trump's Oct. 3 Truth Social post directed at Greenfield exponentially increased the number of threats directed at her.

The report included multiple examples of voicemails that were left on the telephone in Engoron's chambers.

Hollon said the messages have created an "ongoing security risk" for Engoron, his staff and family, but that the gag order had been effective in lowering the number of threats.

"The implementation of the limited gag orders resulted in a decrease in the number of threats, harassment and disparaging messages that the judge and his staff received," Hollon said in the report. "However, when Mr. Trump violated the gag orders, the number of threatening, harassing and disparaging messages increased."

Engoron's lawyer, Lisa Evans, said the threats detailed in Hollon's affirmation justify the gag order, which functions as a reasonable limit on free speech.

"The First Amendment does not prohibit courts from limiting speech that threatens the safety of the court's staff," Evans wrote.

Trump's reply to the filing is due on Nov. 27, after which the First Department will decide whether to fully lift the gag order.