With the defense having rested its case, state attorneys began what they expect to be a brief rebuttal case by calling to the stand Kevin Sneddon, a managing director at Trump International Realty between 2011 and 2012.

State attorneys asked Sneddon about one of the centerpieces of the attorney general's complaint: Trump's penthouse apartment in Trump Tower, which Trump claimed on his statements of financial condition was 30,000 square feet in size when the actual dimensions are a third of that. The overstated size allowed Trump to inflate the value of the apartment by over $200 million, Judge Arthur Engoron decided in his partial summary judgment.

During the defense's case, a former Trump Organization executive blamed Sneddon for the error.

"The person running Trump International Realty at the time, Kevin Sneddon, sent me an email that the triplex was 30,000 square feet," former Trump Organization controller Jeffrey McConney testified.

Sneddon, however, testified that he received the 30,000 square foot figure directly from Trump's main deputy: co-defendant and former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg.

Sneddon said that he received a phone call directly Weisselberg, who requested that he value Trump's penthouse.

"I just knew it was the penthouse. I didn't know much about the apartment itself," Sneddon testified.

"I asked if I could see it. He said that was not possible. I asked if there was a floor plan or any specs. He said he did not have any of that information," Sneddon said. "He said, 'It's quite large. I think it's around 30,000 square feet.'"

When McConney emailed him in September 2012 to ask for help valuing Trump's penthouse, Sneddon said he relied on the figure Weisselberg provided him -- unknowingly providing inaccurate information to McConney.

"I already valued DJT's triplex for Allen," Sneddon wrote in an email shown at trial. "At 30,000 sq. ft., DJT's triplex is worth between 4K and 6K per ft - or 120MM to 180MM."

Trump's attorney Chris Kise fiercely objected to most of Sneddon's brief testimony, describing the questioning as a "free for all."

During a short cross-examination, defense attorney Clifford Robert attempted to discredit the testimony of Sneddon -- who did not testify in the state's case -- by suggesting Sneddon was primed by state attorneys so his testimony would align with the state's theory of the case.

Donald Trump's lawyers rested their case in the former president's civil fraud trial, as New York Attorney General Letitia James watched from the gallery.

Defense attorneys undertook several "housekeeping items" before concluding their case, including adding expert reports to the trial record "for appellate purposes."

"You're going to appeal," Judge Engoron deadpanned before breaking into laughter.

Both parties were argumentative until the end, squabbling over minor issues that threatened to draw out the defense's case.

"We don't want additional time, we want the case to end," said state attorney Kevin Wallace.

With all housekeeping finished, Trump attorney Chris Kise announced, "We do rest." He then made the defense's fifth motion for a directed verdict to end the case, saying he planned to submit a written motion on Friday.

"There is no way I am going to grant that," Judge Engoron responded. "You'd be wasting your time."

Wallace criticized Kise's plan to submit a written motion as "silly" and a "colossal waste of resources."

"We have already won on summary judgment," Wallace said in reference to Engoron's pretrial ruling. "I don't know what we are pretending is happening here."

New York Attorney General Letitia James is attending the afternoon session of Donald Trump's civil fraud trial.

Sitting in the gallery with her staff, James briefly walked into Judge Engoron's chambers before the trial resumed following the midday break.

Trump's legal spokesperson, Alina Habba, was also spotted entering the judge's chambers for a separate meeting.

Court then resumed with defense attorneys conducting their redirect examination of accounting expert Eli Bartov.

Bartov is expected to be the defense's last witness before they rest their case, which will likely be followed by a brief rebuttal case by the state.

In an effort to discredit the defense's accounting expert, state attorney Louis Solomon highlighted that Eli Bartov's testimony was rejected by a judge when he testified as an expert for the New York attorney general in her trial against Exxon Mobil in 2019.

The judge in that case wrote in his ruling that Bartov's testimony during that trial was "unpersuasive" and was "flatly contradicted by the weight of the evidence," according to Solomon's reading of the ruling in court.

Bartov said he was unaware of the ruling, and defense attorney Chris Kise objected to the line of questioning as irrelevant.

Bartov largely stuck to his initial testimony during two hours of cross-examination this morning, defending his overall finding while acknowledging his analysis found that Trump's statements included some marginal overstatements that "did not impact significantly Deutsche Bank's decision to extend loans."

While Bartov agreed that, in the real estate business, "price gets set first, then valuation follows" he said he saw no evidence to support the attorney general's allegation that Trump's statements were reverse engineered to provide support for the values determined by Trump and his executives.

"Do you know if they were reverse engineered?" Solomon asked.

"I have no knowledge of that," Bartov responded.

Present in the courtroom for Bartov's testimony was Eric Trump, who made a surprise appearance in the gallery. Like his father, Eric Trump initially planned to take the stand during the defense's case, but canceled his testimony.

The state's expert witness, Michiel McCarty, calculated that Donald Trump's lenders lost $168 million in potential interest between 2014 and 2023, according to a report he presented in court.

McCarty's testimony appeared to reinforce a central tenet of New York Attorney General Letitia James' case: that Trump's misrepresentations in his financial statements cost banks potential earnings from interest, even if the banks made money on the loans.

State attorney Kevin Wallace directed McCarty to a footnote in Judge Engoron's earlier summary judgment order about the concept of lost interest, in which Engoron said, "The subject loans made the banks lots of money; but the fraudulent SFCs [Statements of Financial Condition] cost the banks lots of money. The less collateral for a loan, the riskier it is, and a first principle of loan accounting is that as risk rises, so do interest rates. Thus, accurate SFCs would have allowed the lenders to make even more money than they did."

McCarty, who said he agreed with this assessment, ultimately found that banks lost a total of $168,040,168 in potential interest from loans related to four of Trump's properties in Miami, New York, Chicago, and Washington, D.C.

Trump attorney Chris Kise fiercely objected, arguing that McCarty was testifying about facts not established during the trial. During questioning, state attorneys declined to ask a Deutsche Bank executive if the bank would have still done business with Trump had they known his financial statements were inflated.

"They are not ill-gotten gains if the bank does not testify it would have done it differently," Kise said.

"I decided these were ill-gotten," the Judge Engoron replied.

Following Wallace's direct examination of McCarty, defense attorney Jesus Suarez began his cross-examination.