St. Croix Renaissance Group v. St. Croix Alumina, LLC
1:04-cv-00067
D.V.I.Nov 19, 2010Background
- Plaintiffs sued St. Croix Alumina, LLC and Alcoa World Alumina, LLC for breach of contract and fraud related to environmental disclosures at the St. Croix property.
- On December 23, 2009, the court granted in part and denied in part the defendants' summary judgment motion.
- Remaining claims allege failure to disclose red mud discharge events and hazardous materials on the property.
- Plaintiffs also pursue fraud in the inducement based on alleged environmental violations related to red mud releases.
- Defendants moved to exclude expert testimony from Peter Ross under Daubert challenges to qualification, reliability, and fit.
- Ross will testify about the mechanics and cost of encapsulating Area B and excavating/moving red mud; he will not opine on remediation necessity or responsibility.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Ross is qualified to opine on construction methods/costs | Ross is sufficiently qualified by 25 years' experience in construction/real estate. | Ross lacks geotechnical/environmental credentials; qualifications are limited. | Ross qualified to testify on specified construction issues. |
| Whether Ross's methodology is reliable for construction cost analysis | Ross uses a standard construction-project methodology based on experience. | Methods may not be best, but this concerns weight, not admissibility. | Ross's methodology deemed reliable under Daubert/Pineda standards. |
| Whether Ross's testimony fits the disputed issues in the case | If environmental violations prove remediation is needed, his cost analyses will be relevant. | There is no current environmental violation or remediation need tied to Ross's topics. | Testimony fits potential disputed issues; admissible to the extent relevant to actual breaches proven at trial. |
Key Cases Cited
- Pineda v. Ford Motor Co., 520 F.3d 237 (3d Cir. 2008) (Daubert factors for reliability)
- Schneider ex rel. Estate of Schneider v. Fried, 320 F.3d 396 (3d Cir. 2003) (test for admissibility; general reliability)
- In re Paoli R.R. Yard PCB Litig., 35 F.3d 717 (3d Cir. 1994) (nonfrivolous Daubert reliability standard; flexibility)
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1993) (reliability and relevance gatekeeping for expert testimony)
- United States v. Downing, 753 F.2d 1224 (3d Cir. 1985) (fit required; testimony bears on disputed facts)