A court employee is under arrest after she tried to approach former President Trump while he was seated in the courtroom.

As the trial was going on, the woman "disrupted the proceedings by standing up and walking towards the front of the courtroom and yelling out to Mr. Trump indicating she wanted to assist him," according to a spokesperson for the New York State Unified Court System.

The woman was stopped by court officers before she got near Trump or any of the attorneys. She was escorted out of the courthouse by court officers and has been charged with disrupting a court proceeding.

No one in the courtroom was ever in any danger, the spokesperson said.

Before the court's afternoon session got underway, Judge Engoron announced he was prohibiting attorneys from holding press conferences or addressing the media inside the courthouse.

The announcement came a day after Trump attorney Alina Habba held a brief press conference during yesterday's lunch break, telling reporters, "This is a scary precedent, legally, for any business in New York."

New York Attorney General Letitia James addressed reporters on the courthouse steps after court had ended for the day yesterday.

Engoron's order does not appear to apply to former President Trump, who is not an attorney. The former president has been addressing the media in the hallway during breaks.

Ladder Capital executive Jack Weisselberg, the son of ex-Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg, has begun his testimony.

The younger Weisselberg testified that he began his career at the investment bank UBS as an analyst, moved to the now-defunct hedge fund Dillon Read Capital Management, then returned to UBS.

"There were layoffs at UBS and across the entire industry," Weisselberg said about his eventual exit from UBS. He testified that he began working at Ladder Capital in 2008.

The New York attorney general alleges that the Trump Organization obtained favorable loan terms with Ladder Capital based on an inflated appraisal of Trump's 40 Wall Street property.

Defense attorney Clifford Robert continued to hammer at real estate appraiser Doug Larson during cross-examination.

Larson -- who met with attorneys from the New York attorney general's office on Monday in advance of his testimony -- was asked if he was shown either of the two emails that this morning prompted him to recall having phone calls with Trump Organization controller Jeffrey McConney, after testifying yesterday that he did not.

"During your prep session Monday, the attorney general didn't show you these two documents?" Robert said while waving printed copies of the two emails in the air, to which Larson replied no.

State attorney Mark Ladov, on redirect examination, read a transcript from an interview with Larson from three years ago, in which Larson was shown the emails and offered a response that was consistent with yesterday's testimony.

"This is beyond absurd," Trump attorney Chris Kise said, objecting to Ladov's approach.

Exiting the courtroom during a break, Trump seized on the Larson's testimony to support his claims that the case should be dismissed.

"The government just got caught in a big, fat lie," Trump said.

The New York attorney general's civil fraud complaint against former President Trump lacks merit, a defense expert in accounting testified.

"My main finding is that there is no evidence whatsoever for any accounting fraud," New York University professor Eli Bartov said. "My analysis shows the statements of financial condition for all the years were not materially misstated."

Bartov's testimony bolstered the defense's contention that non-audited financial statements, like Trump's, are unreliable and represent only a first step in analysis.

"You cannot use the raw numbers in the statements as the basis for making decisions," Bartov said. "If you do that, you are likely to reach the wrong decision."

Judge Engoron asked Bartov whether the attorney general's complaint had no merit.

"This is absolutely my opinion," Bartov replied.

"And why is that?" defense attorney Jesus Suarez jumped in to ask.

"There is not a single reference to a specific provision of GAAP that was violated," Bartov said, referring to the generally accepted accounting principles." "If you allege there was an accounting violation, they have to tell us what provision was violated."

State attorneys objected to the relevance of Bartov's opinion, but Judge Engoron denied the objection.