(1)Where a chief financial officer who was targeted by a civil enforcement action brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission challenged the admission of certain expert witness testimony, the expert’s conclusions helped the jury understand how an auditor would analyze whether a benefit was personal or business, and the expert’s methodology did not misconstrue a legal issue, so the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the testimony.
(2)Where a CFO in a civil enforcement action argued that the district court abused its discretion because instructions for claims regarding the falsification of books should require the jury to find that he acted knowingly, rather than that he did not act reasonably, on an issue of first impression the court finds that a “knowing” element was not included in the relevant provisions.
Vacated in part; affirmed.
SEC v. Das (MLW No. 65323/Case No. 12-2780 – 22 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Shepherd, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of Nebraska, Camp, J. (David A. Zisser, Denver, argued for appellant) (Nicholas Bronni, Washington, D.C., argued for appellee).