Eric Trump confidently stood by his past testimony regarding his limited involvement in an appraisal during a heated exchange with state attorney Andrew Amer.

Amer had spent the better part of the afternoon highlighting emails between Eric Trump and a Cushman & Wakefield appraiser, suggesting that Eric Trump was deeply involved in the appraisal of an estate and golf course in New York's Westchester County. Attempting to paint the testimony as inconsistent, Amer played another portion the deposition Eric Trump had given to investigators.

"I pour concrete. I operate properties. I don't focus on appraisals between a law firm and Cushman. It's just not what I do in my day-to-day responsibilities," Eric Trump said in the deposition.

"Will you concede that your testimony ... that you really haven't been involved in appraisal work on this property was incorrect?" Amer then asked Eric Trump on the stand.

"No. I really hadn't been involved with appraisal work on that property," Eric Trump responded. "I was clearly involved to a very small point. I see your emails. One hundred percent. I made phone calls."

When Amer continued to press the issue, Donald Trump's attorney Chris Kise loudly objected.

"Are you running the courtroom, or is the judge?" Kise shouted to Amer. "It's asked and answered, asked and answered, asked and answered, and it's continued all afternoon. At some point it needs to end."

"There are a handful of emails well over ten years ago ... I stick by that 100%" Eric Trump said.

Eric Trump denied that he ignored a professional appraisal that would have significantly lowered the value of his family's Seven Springs estate in New York's Westchester County.

State attorney Andrew Amer attempted to show Eric Trump multiple emails and calendar invites from 2014 and 2015 to demonstrate that he was personally involved in an appraisal by Cushman & Wakefield executive David McArdle that placed the total value of the property's undeveloped lots between $30 and $50 million.

Trump's 2014 financial statement, in contrast, valued the property at $291 million, including $161 for just seven of the undeveloped lots.

"Can we agree that Mr. McArdle's valuation in relation to the easement donation he was doing was disregarded?" Amer asked.

"No, the exercises are apples and oranges. Nothing to do with each other," Eric Trump responded.

Eric Trump grew visibly irritated as he appeared to struggle with his testimony regarding his father's statement of financial condition.

Resisting state attorney Andrew Amer's efforts to show he was familiar with the document at the center of the case, he at times raised his voice and punctuated his short answers with phrases like "obviously," "clearly," and "as I previously testified." Other times he responded with lengthy equivocations, prompting Amer to exhort him to keep his answers to "yes or no."

"You don't have to give a speech about that," Judge Engoron implored Eric Trump at one point.

Amer repeatedly asked variations of the same question: Was Eric Trump aware of his father's statement of financial condition?

"This is not something I ever recall seeing or working on," Eric Trump said in one clip from his deposition that was played in court. "This is accounting, and that is not what I do on a daily basis."

After acknowledging in his testimony that he provided Trump Organization controller Jeffrey McConney with information for his father's statement of financial condition, Eric Trump was shown video from his own deposition where he appeared to contradict his testimony in court.

"I have no recollection of ever providing Jeff material to be used in a statement that I've ever seen," Eric Trump said in the deposition he gave state attorneys during their probe.

"I don't think it would have ever registered" what the material was for, Eric Trump said in court today, responding to his own statement during his deposition.

The second day of testimony from the defense's expert accounting witness prompted an argument between attorneys for the two sides over the basic question of what the case is about -- leading defense lawyers to make their fourth unsuccessful request for a directed verdict to end the trial.

The arguments came toward the end of direct testimony by accounting expert defense Eli Bartov, who asserted the New York attorney general's case lacked merit because there was no evidence of any fraud on Trump's statements of financial condition, and that any errors about the values of Trump's properties were unintentional and therefore immaterial.

When the defense attempted to question Bartov about those values, state attorneys objected -- prompting defense attorney Christopher Kise to leap from his seat.

"If they don't call anyone to dispute our values, how have they proven their case?" Kise said.

Judge Arthur Engoron, in a pretrial ruling, already decided that Trump conducted a decade's worth of business using fraudulent financial statements, and state attorney Kevin Wallace suggested that Bartov's findings do not change those findings.

"You can't use false statements in business. That's what the summary judgment decision is all about. I think it is pretty much what the rest of this case is about," Engoron said in response to Kise's question.

Kise argued that if the attorney general doesn't prove what Trump's asset values should have been, the case is a "completely rudderless ship" that needs to be "moored to some sort of standard."

"You can't just say it's a misstatement because you feel like it," Kise argued.

"The standard is truth," Engoron responded.

The exchange prompted Trump's legal spokesperson, Alina Habba, to make the defense's fourth motion for a directed verdict, arguing that Engoron is "wasting our time" if he won't consider their expert testimony.

"They have not proven their case. They haven't," Habba said in her request for a directed verdict.

"Denied," Engoron said within seconds of the request, without hearing a response from lawyers for the New York attorney general.