In a case involving failed mortgage-backed securities, the New York County Commercial Division has recently ruled that expert testimony of statistical sampling will be admissible at trial.1 In MBIA Ins. Corp. v. Countrywide Home Loans Inc., Justice Eileen Bransten granted plaintiff’s motion in limine to allow such evidence after finding that the proffered methodology was scientifically accepted and reliable, and that a sampling of the mortgages at issue would be appropriate as the case involved more than 368,000 loans.
While recognizing that defendants’ concerns about the sampling methodology were not without merit, the court noted that it was not necessarily endorsing the plaintiff’s method as better than any other method of proof. The court observed that, ultimately, the plaintiff must show at trial that the sample chosen is actually statistically significant and must “convince the trier of fact, whether it be a jury or this court, that it has proven each element of its separate claims…. Sampling itself is not proof, but merely a vehicle to present evidence.”2
History in New York Courts
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
