Attorneys involved in the case were greeted outside the courthouse this morning by nearly a dozen demonstrators wearing Halloween masks and carrying signs that read "Trick or Treason" and "Trump is a Horror Show."

"We came out because it's Halloween, and our theme is 'Trick or Treason,'" said organizer Jamie Baur of the group Rise and Resist. "We come out on different days, both to challenge [Trump's] lawyers and make sure they know that we hold them accountable for trying to defend the indefensible."

The group has demonstrated outside Trump's civil trial half a dozen times, in addition to holding weekly protests outside Fox News, according to Baur.

"They basically defrauded our state of lots and lots of money and [I am] hoping to see the judge get justice for their state taxpayers and residents," demonstrator Rick Weisfeld said.

Judge Engoron, in an exchange with defense attorneys regarding the state's expert witness, said that levying fines against Trump -- one of the central issues being decided at this trial -- is "clearly an available remedy" despite the defense's contention otherwise.

Engoron already ruled in a partial summary judgment that Trump had submitted "fraudulent valuations" for his assets, leaving the trial to determine additional actions and what penalty, if any, the defendants should receive.

Engoron's observation came during the defense's effort to preclude testimony from the attorney general's expert witness. In denying their effort, the judge also shot down the defense's argument that disgorgement -- fining Trump for illegal profits -- is off the table.

"For reasons this court has explained ad nauseam, that view is simply incorrect," Engoron said. "Disgorgement is a clearly available remedy."

Trump attorney Chris Kise countered that the state has failed to prove that banks would have done anything differently had they known Trump's statements were fraudulent. Kise specifically cited the testimony of Deutsche Bank executive Nicholas Haigh, who testified that loaning money to Trump was a "good credit decision."

"Several witnesses have testified that they would have acted differently had they known the statements of financial condition were fraudulent," Engoron responded.

"I think, to a certain extent, the defendants are whistling past the graveyard here," the judge added.

Day 20 of the trial is scheduled to begin with testimony from K. Don Cornwell, who worked at investment bank Morgan Stanley in 2014 when Donald Trump bid for the Buffalo Bills football team.

He is scheduled to be followed on the witness stand by former Trump Organization executive David Orowitz.

The state's expert witness, Michiel McCarty, is then scheduled to testify later today about the financial implications of Trump's inflated assets -- context that is expected to guide the judge's determination about the size of fine Trump faces, if any.

Members of the Trump family are scheduled to begin testifying tomorrow, starting with Donald Trump Jr.

Lawyers for the New York attorney general, in a late-day court filing, said they support the court-ordered pause on canceling Trump's business certificates -- but warn that a stay of Trump's civil fraud trial would cause a "cascade of delays."

The filing comes more than three weeks after an appeals court, at Trump's request, paused the enforcement of the cancelation of Trump's business certificates that Judge Arthur Engoron had ordered in his summary judgment.

In today's filing, New York Attorney General Letitia James wrote she was "willing to agree to stay enforcement … pending the end of trial and entry of final judgment."

On the other parts of Trump's appeal -- including the request to delay the trial and arguments against Engoron's summary judgment ruling that Trump committed fraud -- James vehemently argued in favor of letting the trial run its course.

"Abruptly halting trial would thus sow chaos and result in an inordinate waste of both public resources and the time and resources of witnesses," James wrote, alleging that Trump is playing courts against one another to create delays.

"Moreover, any delay here would threaten a cascade of delays not only in this case but also in other pending criminal and civil cases against defendant Donald J. Trump," the filing said.

Trump's legal team has until Nov. 9 to submit their reply.

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.