{"id":"LAW-486","kind":"law","level":"law","jurisdiction":"","state":"","metro":"","industry":"","agency":"","eco":"","issuer":"United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit","authority":"United States v. Scop, 846 F.2d 135 (2d Cir. 1988)","instrument":"United States v. Scop, 846 F.2d 135 (2d Cir. 1988)","title":"United States v. Scop, 846 F.2d 135 (2d Cir. 1988)","dateIssued":"1988-05-04","effective":"","end":"","startDate":"1988-05-04","endDate":"","quarters":[],"types":[],"addressees":[],"clause":"","enforcement":"","functions":[],"notes":"\u0027Rule 704 was not intended to allow experts to offer opinions embodying legal conclusions\u0027 (at 139); the witness\u0027s opinions \u0027drew directly upon the language of the statute and accompanying regulations concerning \u0022manipulation\u0022 and \u0022fraud\u0022... In essence, his opinions were legal conclusions that were highly prejudicial and went well beyond his province\u0027 and were \u0027calculated to \u0022invade the province of the court to determine the applicable law and to instruct the jury as to that law\u0022\u0027 (at 140).","sourceUrl":"https://static.case.law/f2d/846/html/0135-01.html","snapshot":"","fileExists":true,"fileBytes":236090,"grade":"primary","character":"case","description":"","collection":"LEG-D","url":"/library/LAW-486","exhibitUrl":"/exhibit/LAW-486","citation":"United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, United States v. Scop, 846 F.2d 135 (2d Cir. 1988) (May 4, 1988) (Ex. LAW-486)","stateName":"","related":[]}