- 14 -
total direct costs and the variable overhead to arrive at the
total profits that DCI and ETS lost during the period 1981
through 1985, which he labeled in Analysis 1 as "Additional
Profit due DCI".
With respect to the portion of the total lost profits
reflected in Analysis 1 that was attributable to ETS, Mr. Wharton
testified at the damages hearing that although he was unable to
determine that portion precisely, "the bulk of what is in the
office profitability would have been from Evergreen." In that
regard, Mr. Wharton further testified with respect to Analysis 1
that: (1) The lost revenues of $553,745 that he allocated to the
office category were lost revenues from clerical and secretarial
services such as typing, photocopying, and transcribing; (2) the
direct costs of $174,939 that he allocated to the office category
were costs that would have been associated with the lost revenues
in that category including variable office costs, such as hourly
rates charged by typists; and (3) the variable overhead of
$155,132 included additional costs that would have been associ-
ated with the lost revenues in the office category.
The District Court's Award of Damages
On January 20, 1987, the District Court issued an opinion
(opinion) in the Farmers lawsuit. In that opinion, the District
Court concluded that the effects of the entry of default in favor
of the plaintiffs and against FIG were (1) to treat as estab-
lished the plaintiffs' factual allegations in the pretrial order
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011