# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 2- 34 59

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
So ut he rn Clu b En te rp ris es , Inc .; 2 50 Cen tra l Av en ue , LLC

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff s - Ap pe ll an ts

v.

Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll ee

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s - Ho t Sp rin gs

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Sep te m

be r 3, 2 01 3 Fi le d: Sep te m

be r 10 , 20 13 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re WOL LMAN, BOW MAN, an d GRUENDER, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

PER CURI AM.

So ut he rn Cl ub Ent erp ris e s , I n c ., an d 25 0 Cen tra l Ave nu e, LLC (co ll ect iv el y So ut he rn Cl ub ), ap pe al th e or de r en te red aft er a be nc h tri al
, in whi ch th e di st ric t co ur t fo un d th e Uni te d St at es li ab le fo r da m ag es to So ut he rn C l u b ’s bu si ne ss (cau se d by

a bl oc ke d cu lv ert dr ai ni ng wate r fro m fed eral la nd ), bu t award ed d a mag e s in an

am ou nt si gn ifi can tl y lo wer th an was req ue st ed

. So ut he rn Cl ub arg ue s th at th e di st ric tco ur t cl earl y e rred in de te rm in in g th e da m ag es

. W e rem an d fo r reco ns id erat io n of

on e cat eg or y

of t he da m ag es cal cu la ti on

.

W e h ol d t ha t th e co ur t di d no t clea rly err in red uc in g th e ou ts id e rem ed ia ti on

ex pe ns es by 50% b as ed on it s fin di ng th at so m e of th e b us in es s’s em ba nk m en t h ad

ero de d o v e r t im e. So ut he rn Cl ub ’s ex pe rt te st ifi ed th at he co ul d no t de te rm in e th e de pt h of th e ba ck y ard de br i s w h i c h w as “ fres hl y di st ur be d so il ,” an d th at hi s cal cu la ti on was ba se d in pa rt on sp ecu la ti on

. See Gon zal ez v. Uni te d St at es , 68 1 F.3 d
94 9, 95 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ) (s ta nd ard of rev ie w); W il ki ns on v. Uni te d St at es , 56 4 F.3 d
92 7, 93 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ) (d am ag es are se t acco rd in g to ap pr op ria te st at e la w); Mi ne rv a Ent ers ., In c. v. Howl et t, 82 4 S.W .2d 37 7, 38 1 (Ark

. 19 92 ) (u nd er Ark an sa s la w, b ur de n of pr ov in g da m ag es r es ts on pa rty cl ai m in g th em ). Fu rth er, we can no t fi n d th at th e co ur t cl earl y erre d in red uc in g th e req ue st ed da m ag es fo r th e bu il di ng

co nt en ts by 87 .5%. W hi le th e co ur t di d no t fu ll y ex pl ai n th e ex te nt of th e red uc ti on , th e co ur t no te d th at so m e it em s app eare d to ha ve a sa lv ag e va lu e th at was no t ta ke n in to acco un t, an d th e reco rd di d no t in cl ud e ev id en ce of th e va lu e o f o th er it em s im m ed ia te ly be fo re th e da m ag e oc cu rred

. See id

. at 38 0- 81 (wh en pe rs on al pr op ert y is da m ag ed
, own er is ent it le d to reco ve r di ffer en ce in fai r va lu e im m ed ia te ly be fo re

an d aft er da m ag e). F o l lo win g a care fu l rev ie w o f th e reco rd , we are no t le ft wit h a fir m an d de fin it e co nv ic ti on th at a m is ta ke ha s be en m ad e. See Kin gm an v. Dil la rd ’s,
In c., 72 1 F.3 d 61 3, 61 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 ) (u nd er cl ear- erro r st an da rd
, c o u r t w i ll

ov ert ur n fact ua l fin di ng on ly if it is no t su pp or te d by su bs ta nt ia l ev id en ce in reco rd
, it is ba se d on erro ne ou s vi ew of la w, or co ur t is le ft wit h de fin it e an d fir m co nv ic ti on th at erro r was m ad e).

W e ag ree wit h So ut he rn Cl ub
, ho wev er, t h a t th e reco rd di d no t su pp or t th e 87 .5% re du ct io n o f th e req ue st ed am ou nt for bu il di ng da m ag e. As t he co ur t n ot ed
, th e ap pl ic ab le m eas ur e of da m ag es was th e reas on ab le ex pe ns e of ne ces sa ry rep ai rs
to th e pr op ert y. S ee Mo rto n v. Park View Apa rtments , 8 68 S.W .2d 44 8, 45 0 (Ark

. 19 93 ). Alt ho ug h th e co ur t no te d t ha t own er St acy Ro be rts ha d no t te st ifi ed ab ou t

-2

-ho w m

uc h ti m e or m on ey he ha d sp en t m ak in g rep ai rs , or th e ex te nt of fu tu re rep ai rs h e in te nd ed to m ak e, So ut he rn Cl ub pr ov id ed an ap pr op ria te m eas ur e of bu il di n g da mag e th ro ug h th e de ta il ed te st im on y of in su ran ce ad jus te r Ada m Jo ne s, who

e s t i mat ed th e flo od lo ss us in g so ftwa re wid el y us ed in th e in du st ry , an d th e
go ve rn m en t di d no t pr ov id e an al te rn at iv e m et ho d of es ti m at in g th e da m ag e. Fu rth er, So ut he rn Cl ub sh ou ld no t be pe na li zed fo r no t ha vi ng th e fu nd s to m ak e so m e of th e
rep ai rs th at w e r e n e c e s s a r y to res to re th e pr op ert y to it s fo rm er st at e. If th e co ur t be li ev es th at so m e red uc ti on in th e am ou nt fo r b u i l di ng da m ag e is ap pr op ria te , th e

co ur t sh ou ld sp eci fy ho w th e req ue st ed am ou nt is ov ers ta te d an d why an y al te rn at iv e

m eas ur e o f da m ag es sh ou ld be us ed

.

Acco rd in gl y , we affi rm th e di st ric t co ur t’s red uc ti on in th e ou ts id e rem ed ia ti on

an d bu il di ng co nt en ts ex pe ns es ; we rev ers e t h e r e d u c t io n in th e bu il di ng da m ag e

ex pe ns es ; an d we r em an d fo r fu rth er p ro ceed in gs co ns is te nt wit h t hi s o pi ni on

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-3

-