First Marblehead Corp. v. House

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an expert witness with almost 20 years of experience as a finance and economics consultant who provided investment advice permissibly testified about how individuals “choose investments and arrange portfolios”
• explaining that, “[w]hile a certified financial planner who focuses entirely on individual investment decisionmaking would also have been qualified to provide this testimony,” the court was “unconvinced” that the expert’s own qualifications made him unqualified
• upholding admission of a financial expert’s testimony on how a reasonable investor would have analyzed stock options
• determining an expert to be 4 qualified based on “nearly two decades of experience as a consultant in economics, finance, and strategy consulting”
• upholding 24 admission of a financial expert's testimony on how a reasonable investor would have analyzed stock options
• \Testimony that provides a necessary context and framework ... can be appropriate for expert testimony.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).