The court was clearly erroneous in its finding that Porter alone was responsible for the boat's devaluation. We remand for the court to decide what amount should be deducted from Wasland's award for his failure to minimize damage through the exercise of reasonable diligence. All right, now I notice on here that there's some marks that have been scratched off. So that's the figure that they put there too. So they agreed that probably was more accurate.
Damages are to be proved to a degree of reasonable certainty.
This submission by Wasland of fabricated damages does not comport to this requirement and allows a party to submit a falsified damages claim. How can you have an expert appraisal on damages that is not based on the expert's own judgment, but on whatever the owner wants. Husky Spray Serv. I think not. Therefore, I would reverse on Issue 3.