Summary
The United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia ruled on Ramaco Resources’ motion to exclude the expert testimony of John L. Weiss. The court denied the motion insofar as Weiss was qualified to opine on the availability of financing and independent contractors for the Eight Kay Mine, but granted it as to his opinion that Ramaco suffered no economic loss because the mine’s development was merely deferred.
Holdings
- Weiss's opinions that a broad range of industry participants could have financed the Eight Kay Mine and that Ramaco could have hired an independent underground mining contractor were relevant and rested on a reliable foundation based on his extensive coal-mining and industry experience.
- Weiss's opinion that Ramaco suffered no economic loss because the Eight Kay Mine had merely been deferred was inadmissible to the extent it assumed that Ramaco suffered no loss from not opening the mine in 2019.
Questions Presented
- Whether Weiss's opinions that Ramaco could have obtained financing for the Eight Kay Mine and could have hired an independent mining contractor were relevant and supported by a reliable foundation under Federal Rule of Evidence 702.
- Whether Weiss's opinion that Ramaco suffered no economic loss because development of the Eight Kay Mine was merely deferred was admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 702.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (6)
- United States v. McLean, 715 F.3d 129, 144 (4th Cir. 2013)(followed)
- Coleman v. Union Carbide Corp., No. 2:11-0366, 2013 WL 5491855, at *17 (S.D.W. Va. Sept. 30, 2013)(followed)
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 597 (1993)(followed)
- Coleman v. Union Carbide Corp., 2013 WL 5461855, at *17(followed)
- United States v. Wilson, 484 F.3d 267, 274 (4th Cir. 2007)(followed)
- Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137, 141-42 (1999)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…