Case Background
A coal silo collapse at a West Virginia mining complex sparked an insurance dispute lasting more than seven years. The case reached a second federal jury in September 2026.
Ramaco Resources, LLC operated mines and a preparation plant at its Elk Creek complex in Logan County, West Virginia. Federal Insurance Company issued Ramaco a Mining Industries Insurance Coverage policy covering July 1, 2018, to July 1, 2019. According to the First Amended Complaint, the policy listed the Elk Creek raw coal silos as covered premises. Ramaco alleged it paid $261,090.33 in premiums for that year.
Ramaco sued Chubb INA Holdings, Inc. and Federal in Logan County Circuit Court in August 2019. The case moved to federal court that September. Its First Amended Complaint replaced Chubb with ACE American Insurance Company. The parties later dismissed Chubb without prejudice. After a 2021 jury trial, the Court set aside the verdict’s dollar amount but entered judgment for Ramaco. On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded in July 2023. The Fourth Circuit’s amended judgment awarded postjudgment interest on $7,653,057 in contract damages. A second trial on additional damages followed.
Cause
According to the First Amended Complaint, the suspended conical hopper inside Silo No. 1 collapsed on November 5, 2018. Federal admitted that Ramaco reported a conical hopper fell inside the silo that day. Ramaco gave notice of its claim the same day. After Hungate Engineering, P.C., recommended demolition, Ramaco tore down the silo by November 19, 2018.
According to the First Amended Complaint, Federal wrote on January 18, 2019, that no coverage was available. The letter relied on a report by engineering firm Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc. It cited exclusions for rust, faulty design, and wear and tear. Ramaco contested the denial on February 1, 2019. It argued that a failed welded joint, not corrosion, most likely caused the collapse. Federal maintained its coverage position in August 2019.
Injury
Ramaco alleged that the demolition immediately cut its raw coal storage capacity and materially impaired its mining operations. It installed a temporary conveyor in November 2018 and a permanent one in February 2019. According to Ramaco, both remaining silos returned to full service by August 1, 2019. During this period, Ramaco claimed it lost business income and incurred extra expenses.
Damages
The First Amended Complaint sought a coverage declaration. It also sought contract damages for demolition costs, lost business income, and extra expenses. In addition, Ramaco requested compensatory and punitive damages, attorneys' fees, costs, and interest.
After the appeal, the Court defined what remained. Its August 19, 2024 order allowed Ramaco to seek "Hayseeds damages" for net economic loss and for aggravation and inconvenience. These damages covered harm caused by the insurers’ delay in settling the claim. Net economic loss claims were limited to July 15, 2021, through October 2, 2023. The Court reserved the attorneys' fees portion of Hayseeds damages until after the merits.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiff: Ramaco Resources, LLC
Counsel for Plaintiff: Philip J. Combs | Emily Ford | Daniel R. Higginbotham | Sherrie Armstrong Davis | Brian A. Glasser [Terminated: 09/01/2023] | Joshua I. Hammack [Terminated: 09/01/2023] | Michael L. Murphy [Terminated: 09/01/2023] | Nicholas S. Johnson [Terminated: 09/01/2023] | Rebecca L. Donnellan-Pomeroy [Terminated: 09/01/2023]
Defendants: Federal Insurance Company | ACE American Insurance Company | Chubb INA Holdings, Inc. [Terminated: 11/12/2019]
Counsel for Defendants: Michael B. Hissam | Jonathan Zak Ritchie | Daniel B. Schwaber | Maureen F. Gleason | Grace E. Leeper | Jonathan Hacker | John Eggum | Matthew S. Ponzi | James Jarrod Jordan [Terminated: 05/29/2026] | Matthew J. Perry [Terminated: 09/22/2023] | Skyler A. Matthews [Terminated: 02/20/2025]
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
Claims
Ramaco's First Amended Complaint asserted four counts. Count I sought a declaratory judgment against Federal and ACE. Count II alleged breach of contract against Federal. Count III alleged that Federal breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Count IV alleged that both insurers violated the West Virginia Unfair Trade Practices Act.
Ramaco also accused the insurers of "post-claim underwriting." It alleged they skipped any silo inspection before issuing the policy and looked for exclusions only after the loss.
Before the first trial, the Court granted Defendants summary judgment on Count IV and punitive damages. The Court also barred Silo No. 1 replacement costs. Meanwhile, it granted Ramaco summary judgment on two affirmative defenses based on policy exclusions.
Defense
Federal and ACE denied breaching the policy or acting in bad faith. Federal also denied engaging in post-claim underwriting. ACE denied handling Ramaco's claim and denied being a party to the policy. Defendants invoked exclusions for inherent vice, wear and tear, and rust or corrosion. They also argued that Ramaco could not prove a covered peril caused its loss.
Before the second trial, the Court denied Defendants partial summary judgment on Ramaco’s “Eight Kay Mine” damages theory. It also partly denied Ramaco’s motion to exclude defense expert John L. Weiss. Weiss could testify on whether Ramaco could have obtained financing for that mine. However, the Court excluded aggravation and inconvenience evidence after October 2, 2023.
Jury Verdict
The second trial ran from September 22 to September 25, 2026, before Judge Joseph R. Goodwin. Ramaco called seven witnesses and played video depositions of Frank Gonsalves and Steven Magnotta. Its First Amended Complaint had named both men among the Chubb employees it believed handled the claim.
The jury answered "yes" to both liability questions on the verdict form. First, it found that Ramaco suffered corporate aggravation and inconvenience from November 12, 2018, through October 2, 2023. The jury found that Defendants' delay in settling the claim proximately caused that harm. It awarded $2,500,000 for aggravation and inconvenience.
Next, the jury found that Ramaco incurred net economic loss between July 15, 2021, and October 2, 2023. Again, it found that Defendants' delay proximately caused the loss. The jury awarded $27,500,000 for net economic loss. Together, the two awards totaled $30,000,000. The Court entered judgment for Ramaco against Federal and ACE the same day.
Post-trial Motions
On October 9, 2026, Ramaco moved for attorneys' fees and expenses under Hayseeds. Defendants opposed that request on October 23. The same day, Defendants filed a renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law or, alternatively, a new trial. Ramaco also moved to alter the judgment on October 23.
Court Documents:
Documents are available for purchase upon request at [email protected]
