Opinion ID: 710674
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Earnings Lost After The Barge Collision.

Text: 13 The district court found the barge accident, not Peek's attack, ended Pedersen's skipper's career. Although Pedersen contends his injuries caused the barge accident, substantial evidence supports the district court's finding to the contrary. Pedersen also argues that because Peek attacked him before the barge accident, the assault alone caused his loss under Buchalski v. Universal Marine Corp., 393 F.Supp. 246 (W.D.Wash.1975). However, Pedersen was not an innocent victim of another force or another tort, like the heart attack victim in Buchalski; he negligently rammed the County's ferry into a barge in mid-river on a clear day. Under these circumstances, the district court did not clearly err in finding the barge collision alone caused Pedersen to lose his skipper's job. 14 However, the district court did not explain its finding that Peek's attack reduced Pedersen's earning capacity by $10,000 per year. The district court did not find what Pedersen would have earned over those years but for Peek's attack, and did not address Pedersen's duty to mitigate damages. Consequently, neither the County nor Pedersen can meaningfully appeal the award. We therefore vacate the award of earnings lost following the barge collision and remand so the district court may make the factual findings underlying the award. Lumbermen's Underwriting Alliance v. Can-Car, Inc., 645 F.2d 17, 18-19 (9th Cir.1980). Pain And Suffering 15 In light of all of the medical evidence, the district court did not clearly err in calculating Pedersen's damages for pain and suffering. The district court understood the well-settled tort principle that a tortfeasor takes the plaintiff as he finds him, ER 75, and concluded Pedersen would have endured pain and suffering from his pre-existing medical and emotional conditions even if Peek had not attacked him. 16 AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.