Deutsche Bank's $378 million in loans to the Trump Organization was a "good credit decision," the bank's former risk management executive told the court at the end of more than a day of testimony.

"I think we did a reasonably thorough analysis of the information," former Deutsche Bank executive Nicholas Haigh testified under cross-examination by the defense.

An internal Deutsche Bank group evaluated Trump's financial information, personally visited Trump Organization offices to review bank and brokerage records, and conducted some appraisals of property explicitly used as collateral, according to Haigh.

Though the value that Deutsche Bank determined for the properties often differed by hundreds of millions of dollars compared to the Trump-provided value, the entities continued to have what internal bank documents described as a "long and satisfactory relationship."

"Using a Deutsche Bank-adjusted value for the assets, the net worth still exceeded $2.5 billion," Haigh said, referring to Trump's net worth as it related to a loan covenant.

When Trump decided to run for president and won the election, Deutsche Bank was supportive of the business relationship, though management was careful to monitor their particularly high-profile client, according to internal bank documents presented at trial.

"Note that the relationship continues to be monitored at the highest levels of senior management within the firm and any issues arising from the Guarantor's status as President of the United States are immediately addressed, taken to the appropriate Reputation Risk committee, and discussed with appropriate legal counsel," a credit report said.

When asked directly if the decision to work with Trump was a "good credit decision" by defense attorney Clifford Robert, Haigh responded, "I generally agree with that."

During redirect questioning, state attorney Kevin Wallace stopped short of directly asking Haigh if he would have still done business with Trump had he known about the inflated value of Trump's assets. But he asked Haigh whether Trump's financial information could have been incomplete.

"You have no way of knowing if there was information that wasn't provided to you?" Wallace asked.

"That is correct," Haigh said, marking the end of his questioning.

Former President Trump is expected to return to New York next week to attend the ongoing civil trial, sources tell ABC News.

The former president, who is not required to be in court for the civil proceeding, appeared in court last week for the first three days of the trial.

He is expected to take the stand later in the trial.

Sources tell ABC News that Trump could attend multiple days next week beginning Tuesday.

Trump's attendance could bring him face-to-face with his former attorney and one-time loyal aide Michael Cohen, who is expected to take the stand in the case.

Former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg is back at the New York Supreme Court courthouse today to possibly continue his direct examination.

If Deutsche Bank risk management executive Nicholas Haigh concludes his testimony this afternoon, Weisselberg will return to the witness stand to face questions from state attorney Louis Solomon.

Weisselberg's testimony began on Monday but was postponed to accommodate a scheduling conflict.

While he acknowledged that some of Trump's assets -- like his Trump Tower penthouse apartment -- were overvalued in the firm's financial documents, Weisselberg responded to dozens of Solomon's questions by saying that he could not recall or remember.

The longtime CFO was released from New York's Rikers Island jail complex in April after serving more than three months for tax fraud, after he pleaded guilty to 15 felony charges related to his compensation while working for Trump.

During his testimony on Monday, Weisselberg acknowledged that he signed a $2 million severance agreement with the Trump Corporation in January. That agreement, which was entered into evidence, limits Weisselberg's ability to cooperate with investigators unless compelled by the court, or to disparage the Trump Organization.

The agreement also set a payment schedule for Weisselberg to receive the severance money across eight $250,0000 payments. According to the schedule, he has only received $750,000 so far, with the remaining payments spread out over the coming year.

Deutsche Bank's internal credit reports related to Donald Trump's loans offered a positive -- at times glowing -- assessment of his assets, evidence presented in court showed.

"The general conclusion is that the hotel will become the most elite hospitality establishment in Washington, DC, once stabilized," a report said about the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C., for which Deutsche Bank financed over $100 in debt.

That same report suggested that the "highest levels" of Deutsche Bank's management supported the bank's relationship with Trump as he began to campaign for president, defense attorney Jesus Suarez told the court.

"Relationship has been reviewed and supported from a Management Board perspective in connection with the Guarantor's candidacy for president of the United States," Deutsche Bank's 2016 credit report said.

Deutsche Bank executive Nicholas Haigh testified that the bank's "own analysis" supported approving Trump's loans, despite that analysis often suggesting that Trump's reported asset valuations were off by hundreds of millions of dollars.

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.