Opinion ID: 3026296
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Damages Evidence and Award

Text: Mazzio's also appeals the district court's evidentiary ruling and damages award in regard to the value of the land. Mazzio's first quibbles with the district court's decision allowing First Financial's president to testify as to the value of the land. However, Arkansas law grants broad authority for land owners to testify as to the value of their land. See Ark. State Highway Comm'n v. Mullens, 502 S.W.2d 626, 627 (Ark. 1973). Some of the testimony by the president of First Financial was based on hearsay; however, in light of the president's other sources of information, we perceive no abuse of discretion in admitting this testimony. See Ogden v. Wax Works, Inc., 214 F.3d 999, 1010 (8th Cir. 2000). As for the damages award itself, we believe the district court accurately applied Arkansas law on First Financial's expectations damages. See Green v. Ferguson, 567 S.W.2d 89, 92 (Ark. 1978). The district court was in the best position to make credibility determinations as to First Financial's president; moreover, Mazzio's presented no testimony on the value of the land. Accordingly, the district court's findings were not clearly erroneous.