Pentecostal Church of DeQuincy v. Church Mutual Insurance Co S I
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LAKE CHARLES DIVISION
PENTECOSTAL CHURCH OF CASE NO. 2:22-CV-02782 DEQUINCY VERSUS JUDGE JAMES D. CAIN, JR. CHURCH MUTUAL INSURANCE CO S I MAGISTRATE JUDGE LEBLANC MEMORANDUM ORDER Before the Court is “CMIC’s Motion in Limine to Exclude or Limit Testimony of Louis G. Fey, Jr.” (Doc. 157).
BACKGROUND On August 27, 2020, Hurricane Laura made landfall in Southwest Louisiana. In the original Complaint, The Pentecostal Church of DeQuincy (“TPCD”) alleges that it sustained damage from the Hurricane, and that Church Mutual has underestimated the cost of repairs. The five (5) buildings considered as “Covered Property” at issue in this litigation are identified as the: (1) Sanctuary, (2) Activity Center, (3) Sunday School/Fellowship Hall, (4) Mobile Home, and (5) Pole Barn. During the relevant time period, Church Mutual provided coverage for the Covered Property.
TPCD reported its claimed loss on September 1, 2020. For a complete recitation of the facts, see the Memorandum Ruling issued on July 21, 2025.1
1 Doc. 117.
LAW AND ANALYSIS TPCD has retained Louis G. Fey, JR. as their expert on insurance claims handling, underwriting, and bad faith. Church Mutual maintains that Fey’s report and opinions contained therein, misstate alleged facts, make irrelevant assumptions and conclusions, make legal conclusions about coverage of TPCD’s claims and Church Mutual’s alleged bad faith, and contain unsupported opinions concerning whether Church Mutual and TPCD complied with certain policy provisions. Additionally, Church Mutual asserts that Fey makes numerous unsupported contentions regarding unspecified “insurance industry standards”, which he also designates as “universally accepted insurance industry standards” and “universal standards” to “evaluate CMIC’s actions in this matter”.2 Church Mutual moves to preclude Fey from testifying as to any legal conclusion, including using terms or phrases such as “arbitrary,” “capricious,” “without probable cause,” “misrepresented”, “vexatious”, or “untimely” as these are legal terms of art. Church Mutual argues that any opinion by Fey that is a legal conclusion is inadmissible, citing Eaux Holdings LLC v. Scottsdale Ins. Co., 2021 WL 5991700 (W.D. La. Oct. 12, 2021); Versai Mgmt. Corp. v. Landmark Am. Ins. Corp., 2013 WL 681902 (E.D. La. Feb.
22, 2013); SJB Grp., LLC v. TBE Grp., Inc., 2013 WL 4499+032 (M.D. La. Aug. 19, 2013).
TPCD informs the Court that Fey will not be testifying or providing legal conclusions at the trial of the matter and reminds the Court that it has permitted Fey in past trials to testify as to “the facts with regard to Defendants’ handling of the claim, the general
2 Defendant’s exhibit 1, pp. 1 and 12. nature of the claims handling process, and the applicable industry standards in handling property damage claims.” Charles Town Props. of La., LLC v, Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 232021, *2 (W.D. La. Sept. 20,2023) (bench trial); Church of the King of Lake Charles v. GuideOne Mut. Ins. Co., 2021 WL 5126710, *6 (W.D. La. Nov. 3, 2021).
The Court in several of the cases citied herein has denied Daubert motions finding the Fey has a vast amount of experience and will be permitted to testify about insurance claims handling practices, insurance industry standards, customs, and practices applicable to handling insurance claims. However, this Court has never allowed Fey to provide legal opinions.
CONCLUSION For the reasons explained herein, IT IS ORDERED that CMIC’s Motion in Limine to Exclude or Limit Testimony of Louis G. Fey, Jr.” (Doc. 157) is GRANTED to the extent that Fey will be prohibited from testifying regarding any legal opinion or legal conclusion including testimony as to Church Mutual’s alleged “bad faith” or use terms or phrases that purport to draw a legal conclusion; otherwise the Motion is DENIED.
THUS DONE AND SIGNED in chambers on this 4th day of February, 2026.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Page 3 of 3
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.