Opinion
Civil Action No: 97-2757 SECTION: "J" (3)
April 16, 2001
MINUTE ENTRY
At the status conference held on April 11, 2001, counsel for USFG advised the Court of his intention to offer the expert testimony of Richard G. Clarke at trial. Counsel stated that Mr. Clarke's testimony would assist the Court in determining the coverage afforded to the Schwegmann defendants for ERISA liability under USFG's insurance policy. At the conference, the Court expressed doubt as to whether Mr. Clarke would be allowed to testify given that his testimony likely offered a legal conclusion. Nevertheless, the Court accepted a copy of Mr. Clarke's expert report and took the matter under advisement.
Having now reviewed the report, the Court concludes that Mr. Clarke's testimony is inadmissible. It is well-established in the Fifth Circuit that Federal Rule of Evidence 704 does not permit an expert to render conclusions of law. United States of America v. $9,041,598.68, 163 F.3d 238, 255 (5th Cir. 1998) (citing Snap-Drape, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue 98 F.3d 194 (5th Cir. 1996)). Expert testimony that offers a legal opinion is inadmissible. Estate of Sowell v. United States of America, 198 F.3d 169 (5th Cir. 1999); Askanase v. Fatjo, 130 F.3d 657, 669 (5th Cir. 1997). In accordance with these principles, testimony by an expert which requires him to construe an insurance contract usurps the function of the Court, and is therefore, inadmissible. Breezy Point Coop., Inc. v. Cigna Property Cas. Co., 868 F. Supp. 33, 36 (E.D.N.Y. 1994). Accordingly;
IT IS ORDERED that Richard G. Clarke will not be permitted to testify at trial.