Court Permits Expert Reports With Disclosure Gaps But Recognizes Limits On Trial Testimony

My colleague Matt Donovan recently wrote about the requirements of Commercial Division Rule 13(c) and highlighted certain decisions in which expert reports were precluded for non-compliance. This week's post looks at a decision by newly-appointed Manhattan Commercial Division Justice Nancy M. Bannon, who denied a motion to preclude expert reports despite non-compliance with the rule. In the decision, Justice Bannon sheds light on the boundary between admissible and impermissible expert opinions, particularly when reports encroach on the court's authority to opine on legal conclusions, while also imposing specific limitations on the expert's testimony.

Background

In 2497 Realty Corp. v. Fuertes, the plaintiff sold a contaminated property to the defendant, which had been impacted by an oil spill from a nearby gas station owned by non-party, ExxonMobil. Plaintiff and defendant entered into an agreement under which the defendant agreed to take on