Covol Fuels No. 4 v. Pinnacle Mining Co.

BVLaw
Full Text of Court Cases
February 4, 2016
1241 Coal Mining Services
213113 Support Activities for Coal Mining
contract
damages, lost profits, daubert, discount rate, expert testimony, weighted average cost of capital (WACC), admissibility, causation, reliability, projections

Covol Fuels No. 4 v. Pinnacle Mining Co.
2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14151
US
Federal Court
West Virginia
United States District Court
Vincent Thomas (plaintiff); unknown (defendant)
Berger

Summary

Court rejects defendant’s relevance attack on plaintiff expert’s opinion, noting under Daubert testimony need not “fit” a particular cause of action but is relevant where it assesses damages based on harm to plaintiff caused by defendant’s misconduct.
Covol Fuels No. 4 v. Pinnacle Mining Co.
PDF, Size: 63 KB

See Also

Defendant’s Obfuscatory Tactics to Preclude Expert Testimony Fail

Court rejects defendant’s relevance attack on plaintiff expert’s opinion, noting under Daubert testimony need not “fit” a particular cause of action but is relevant where it assesses damages based on harm to plaintiff caused by defendant’s misconduct.