Hygh v. Jacobs, 961 F.2d 359 (2d Cir. 1992)

'This circuit is in accord with other circuits in requiring exclusion of expert testimony that expresses a legal conclusion' (at 363); 'Even if a jury were not misled into adopting outright a legal conclusion proffered by an expert witness, the testimony would remain objectionable by communicating a legal standard -- explicit or implicit -- to the jury' (at 364); the testimony 'regarding the ultimate legal conclusion entrusted to the jury crossed the line and should have been excluded' (at 364).