- 39 -
(2) Analysis 1 on which the District Court relied in awarding the
lost profits damages; (3) Mr. Wharton's testimony at the damages
hearing regarding Analysis 1 on which the District Court relied
in awarding those damages; (4) other evidence presented at the
damages hearing on which the District Court relied in making a
few minor adjustments to Mr. Wharton's determinations in Analysis
1; (5) those minor adjustments; and (6) the facts that DCI formed
ETS in 1982 and operated it until sometime during the early part
of 1983 at which time the Diamonds acquired and operated ETS as a
sole proprietorship. We find on the record before us that, of
the total amount of lost profits damages (viz., $1,497,016) that
the District Court awarded to the plaintiffs in the Farmers
lawsuit, $1,222,948 was awarded to DCI and $274,068 was awarded
to the Diamonds as the owners of ETS.
As for the remainder of the proceeds of the Farmers lawsuit
at issue, viz., punitive damages of $290,715, attorneys' fees and
costs of $226,212,30 and interest of $177,881, we believe that it
is reasonable to assume that each of the foregoing components of
those proceeds that were awarded to DCI and to the Diamonds as
the owners of ETS were awarded in the same proportions as the
lost profits damages were awarded, i.e., 81.69 percent to DCI and
18.31 percent to the Diamonds. Accordingly, we find that the
District Court awarded each of the following components of the
30 See supra note 10.
Page: Previous 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011