{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;}
{\f36\fnil\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 00000400000000000000}WP TypographicSymbols{\*\falt Courier New};}{\f169\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;}{\f170\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;}
{\f172\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f173\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;}{\f174\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);}{\f175\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);}
{\f176\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f177\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese);}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255;\red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;
\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0;\red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;}
{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\*
\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv 
\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\*\cs15 \additive \sbasedon10 \ssemihidden footnote reference;}{
\s16\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext16 \styrsid14756782 header;}{\s17\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext17 \styrsid14756782 footer;}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid3019543\rsid5394930\rsid7041704\rsid9508377\rsid14756782}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 10.0.6764;}{\info
{\title IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\author lroberto}{\operator blake_r}{\creatim\yr2005\mo8\dy12\hr9\min4}{\revtim\yr2006\mo3\dy14\hr8\min37}{\version4}{\edmins4}{\nofpages17}{\nofwords7782}{\nofchars44363}{\*\company Superior Court of Guam}
{\nofcharsws52041}{\vern16391}}\margl1440\margr1440 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\notabind\wraptrsp\transmf\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\truncatefontheight\subfontbysize\sprsbsp\wpjst\lytprtmet\hyphcaps0\horzdoc\dghspace120
\dgvspace120\dghorigin1701\dgvorigin1984\dghshow0\dgvshow3\jcompress\viewkind4\viewscale100\nolnhtadjtbl\rsidroot3019543 \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {
\insrsid3019543 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid3019543 \chftnsepc 
\par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid3019543 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid3019543 \chftnsepc 
\par }}\sectd \sbknone\linex0\headery1440\footery1440\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid3019543\sftnbj {\header \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\i\fs20\insrsid3019543 
B.M. Co. v. Avery, }{\fs20\insrsid3019543 Opinion\tab Page }{\field{\*\fldinst {\fs20\insrsid3019543 PAGE }}{\fldrslt {\fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid5394930 17}}}{\fs20\insrsid3019543  of 28
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid3019543 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sl-9\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid5394930 
{\shp{\*\shpinst\shpleft1440\shptop0\shpright10800\shpbottom9\shpfhdr1\shpbxpage\shpbxignore\shpbypara\shpbyignore\shpwr3\shpwrk0\shpfblwtxt1\shpz0\shplockanchor\shplid2049{\sp{\sn shapeType}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn fFlipH}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fFlipV}{\sv 0}}
{\sp{\sn fillColor}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fillBackColor}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fFilled}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn lineWidth}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fLine}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fShadow}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn posrelh}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fBehindDocument}{\sv 1}}
{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}}{\shprslt{\*\do\dobxpage\dobypara\dodhgt0\dprect\dpx1440\dpy0\dpxsize9360\dpysize9\dpfillfgcr0\dpfillfgcg0\dpfillfgcb0\dpfillbgcr0\dpfillbgcg0\dpfillbgcb0\dpfillpat1\dplinehollow}}}}{\insrsid3019543 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sl-240\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid3019543 
\par }}{\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}}
{\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8
\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 B.M. Co.,
\par A Guam Partnership}{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
\par }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross-Appellee
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 vs.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 JIMMY K. AVERY AND MARIA F. AVERY}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
\par Defendants-Appellees/Cross-Appellants}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Supreme Court Case No.: CVA00-026
\par Superior Court Case No.: CV0422-95}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 OPINION}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Filed:}{\b\insrsid5394930  }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 December 27, 2001}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Cite as:}{\b\insrsid5394930  }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 2001 Guam 27}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam
\par Argued and submitted on September 21, 2001
\par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam }{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
\par }\trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trqc\trgaph120\trleft-120\trftsWidth1\trpaddl120\trpaddr120\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3\tblrsid5394930 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl 
\cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx4560\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx9240\pard 
\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
\par }{\ul\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Appearing for Plaintiff-Appellant/
\par Cross-Appellee}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 :
\par Ron Moroni, }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Esq}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 .
\par Law Office Thomas M. Tarpley, Jr.
\par A Professional Corp.
\par Suite 201, American Life Bldg.
\par 137 Murray Blvd.
\par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam 96910\cell 
\par }{\ul\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Appearing for Defendants-Appellees/}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
\par }{\ul\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Cross-Appellants}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 :
\par Maria T. Cenzon-Duenas, }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Esq}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 .
\par Mair, Mair, Spade, & Thompson
\par A Professional Corp.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
\par Suite 807, GCIC Bldg.
\par 414 W. Soledad Ave.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
\par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam 96910\cell }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow 
\ts11\trqc\trgaph120\trleft-120\trftsWidth1\trpaddl120\trpaddr120\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3\tblrsid5394930 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx4560\clvertalt\clbrdrt
\brdrtbl \clbrdrl\brdrtbl \clbrdrb\brdrtbl \clbrdrr\brdrtbl \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx9240\row }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 BEFORE: F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO, Chief Justice (Acting)}{\cs15\super\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\super\insrsid3019543 1 }{\fs20\insrsid3019543 Chief Justice Siguenza recused himself from 
deciding this matter.  Justice F. Philip Carbullido, as next senior member of the panel, was designated as the acting Chief Justice.}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , JOHN A. MANGLONA, Designated Justice, and RICHARD H. BENSON, Justice }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Pro Tempore}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 .}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 CARBULLIDO, J.:
\par }{\b\insrsid5394930 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [1]\tab }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The Appellant, B.M. Co., A Guam Partnership (hereinafter, }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}
{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 BM Co.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
), appeals from a judgment entered in the Superior Court awarding damages to the Appellees, Jimmy and Maria Avery (hereinafter }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Averys}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 ) in a breach of contract action.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 BM Co. argues that the trial court erred in excluding two expert witnesses.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 BM Co. further contends
 that the trial court erred in denying its post-verdict motions in which BM Co. made the following arguments: (1) the evidence did not support the award of damages for the cost of repairing construction defects; (2) BM Co. was not legally obligated to ind
emnify the Averys for damage caused to a neighboring property; (3) BM Co. was not legally obligated to pay damages for loss rentals; and (4) the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s verdict was the product of passion
 or prejudice.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The Averys filed a cross-appeal, arguing that the trial court erred in reducing the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award of liquidated damages.
}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 We reject the Averys}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  argument on cross-appeal.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 We similarly reject BM Co.}{
\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s challenge to part of the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award for construction defects and its argument that the jury}{
\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award was based on passion or prejudice.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 We agree with B.M. Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s challenges to the trial court}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s exclusion of its expert witnesses, which we hold was an abuse of discretion, and the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award for lost rentals and the indemnity claim, which we hold were erroneous as a matter of law.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Accordingly, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for a new trial as to the Averys}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  claim for damages for certain construction defects.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 I.}{\b\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [2]\tab }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The instant appeal arises out of a breach of contract action filed by BM Co. against the Averys.}{
\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The parties entered into a construction contract on July 23, 1992.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Under the contract, BM Co. was required to build a two-story commercial building with a warehouse in Barrigada, Guam.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The original contract price was $975,000.00.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The Averys were obligated to make monthly progress payments and to deduct five percent of each payment as retainage due at the end of the project.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Shortly after signing the contract, the parties added a supplement which included a clause which allowed for liquidated damages of $265.00 per day in the event BM Co. inexcusably failed to complete the work by the completion date.}{
\cs15\super\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\fs20\super\insrsid3019543 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid3019543 
 The liquidated damages clause provided: }{\fs20\insrsid3019543 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid3019543 
The Contractor shall pay $265.00 per day as Liquidated Damage to the Owner in the event of [sic] that the entire contract work [sic] not completed within the contract completion date without any reasons described in Article 3 of the agreement.}{
\fs20\insrsid3019543 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{\fs20\insrsid3019543   Appellee}{\fs20\insrsid14756782 '}{\fs20\insrsid3019543 
s Supplemental Excerpts of Record, tab 10, p.1 (Supplement to Agreement) (emphasis added).}}}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [3]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab BM Co. was required to construct the building }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 per the approved contract drawings,}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  Appellee}{
\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s Supplemental Excerpts of Record, tab 9 (Art. 2 of Construction Contract), and A.E.S. Inc. was designated as the architect.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
The A.E.S. Inc. drawings entailed work that was more expensive and time consuming than BM Co. originally anticipated.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Due to the added work, a change work order was made which increased the contract price by $170,000.00 and added forty-five calendar days to contract, bringing the contract price to $1,145,000.00 and moving the completion date to November 9, 1993.}{
\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The parties later extended the completion date to November 15, 1993.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 BM Co. did not complete the project by the specified completion date.}{
\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [4]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Subsequent to the Averys}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
 occupation of the building, BM Co. filed an action in the Superior Court claiming damages for money owed to them for additional work performed at the Averys}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  request.}{\insrsid5394930  
}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The Averys filed a counterclaim alleging that the work was defective and that repair costs should be deducted from any money owed to BM Co. under the contract.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
The Averys also claimed liquidated damages for the delays.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [5]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab The case went to trial and the jury returned a verdict for the Averys on all claims and counterclaims, and determined 
that the Averys were entitled to liquidated damages for 2,367 days totaling $627,255.00.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Included in the 2,367 days were the days that the Averys occupied the building.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The trial court filed a judgment on the verdict on May 26, 2000.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [6]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Subsequent to the verdict, BM Co. made a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (hereinafter }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 JNOV}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
) and for a new trial.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
On September 13, 2000, the trial court filed a Decision and Order granting the motion for JNOV as to the liquidated damages award, reducing the award by $603,935.00, which represented the days that the Averys took occupancy and bega
n renting out the building.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The trial court did not amend the remainder of the jury award, and the Amended Judgment was filed on October 6, 2000.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
This appeal and cross-appeal followed.}{\insrsid5394930  
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 II.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [7]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab This court has jurisdiction over the appeal of a final jud
gment of the Superior Court of Guam pursuant to Title 7 GCA }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  3107 (1994).}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 III.}{\b\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 A.}{\b\insrsid5394930  }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The Trial Court}{\b\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s Reduction of the Jury}{\b\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s Award of Liquidated Damages.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [8]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab In its cross-appeal, the Averys argue that the trial court erred in granting JNOV in favor of BM Co., reducing the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award of liquidated damages.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 We find this issue to be significant and therefore discuss it at the outset.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Appellate courts review the grant of JNOV using the same standard the trial court employs.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See Phillips v. Ceribo}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
, Civ. No. 81-000124, 1982 WL 30792, at * 2 (D. Guam App. Div. Nov. 15, 1982) (citing }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 William Inglis, Etc. v. ITT Cont. Baking Co.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 668 F.2d 1014, 1026 (9th Cir. 1982)).}{
\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Viewing the evidence and its inferences most favorably to the nonmoving party, the court determines whether the evidence reasonably supports only judgment for the moving party.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 . (citations omitted).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 A trial court}{
\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s grant of a motion for JNOV is proper only if there is no substantial evidence to support the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s conclusions and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 .; }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 see also Leon Guerrero v. DLB Constr. Co.}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 1999 Guam 9, }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  11.}{\insrsid5394930  
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [9]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab An appellate court reviews the principles relied upon by the trial court in interpreting a contract }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 de novo}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Shiroma v. Ysrael}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , Civ. No. 86-0029A, 1987 WL 109889, at *2 (D. Guam App. Div. July 17, 1987) (citation omitted).}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 When the trial court looks merely to the contract language in interpreting the contract, and not to extraneous facts, the court}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s interpretation is a legal conclusion and is thus reviewed }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 de novo}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 .}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See Apana v. Rosario}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
, Civ. No. 95-00024A, 1995 WL 604354, at *2 (D. Guam App. Div. Sept. 29, 1995); }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 see also Pesino v. Atlantic Bank}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 709 A.2d 540, 545 (Conn. 1998) (}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [W]here there is definitive contract language, the determination of what the 
parties intended by their contractual commitments is a question of law.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 ) (citation omitted); }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 see also Scarborough v. Ridgeway}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 726 F.2d 132, 135 (4th Cir. 1984).}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [10]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab In the instant case, our role is to step into the shoes of the trial court in determining whether JNOV was proper.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Standing in the shoes of the trial court, this court must determine whether, viewing the contract language, the parties intended that liquidated damages stop accruing upon substantial completion.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [11]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab The liquidated damages clause provides:}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Liquidated Damage: The Contractor shall pay $265.00 per day as Liquidated Damage to the Owner in the event of [sic] that the entire co
ntract work [sic] not completed within the contract completion date without any reasons described in Article 3 of the agreement.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Appellee}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s Supplemental Excerpts of Record, tab 10, p.1 (Supplement to Agreement).}{\insrsid5394930  
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [12]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Article 3 of the contract provides:}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 TIME OF COMMENCEMENT AND SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION:}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
The work to be performed under this Contract shall be commenced within 10 calendar days after receipt of written Notice to Proceed.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Substantial Completion of the Work shall be achieved not later than 365
 calendar days from the date the Written Notice to Proceed [sic] received, however, the completion time can be adjusted in accordance with the following occasions.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 1. Severe weather and Act of God.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 2. Differing site conditions.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 3. Stoppage or suspension of the work by the Owner.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 4. Owner}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s failure to obtain necessary permits on time.}{
\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 5.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Other reasons beyond the Contractor}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s control.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Appellee}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s Supplemental Excerpts of Record, tab. 9, p. 2 (Standard Form Agreement).}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [13]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab 
As referenced above, the liquidated damages clause provides that liquidated damages are recoverable if the contract is not fully completed by the contract completion date and the delay in completion was not attributable to the causes listed in Article 3 o
f the contract.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
While the liquidated damages clause references when liquidated damages are triggered, the clause does not address the issue in this case, that is, when the liquidated damages stops accruing.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
We must determine whether other provisions of the contract resolve this issue.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [14]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab The trial court relied upon Article 3 of the contract in determining that liquidated damages would stop accruing upon substantial completion.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 We similarly find Article 3 to be determinative.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Article 3 evidences the parties}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
 intent that the requisite degree of completion, for purposes of defining a delay, was substantial completion, and not full completion.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Specifically, pursuant to Article 3, barring a delay caused by an event enumerated under the Article, BM Co. was required to substantially complete the project by the date specified in the contract.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
A delay to the project was therefore delineated as a failure to substantially complete the work by the specified date.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 In light of the parties}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  intent that
 a delay to the work is defined with reference to substantial completion rather than full completion, we interpret the contract to mean that a delay compensable under the liquidated damages clause is the period of time that the contract was not substantia
lly completed.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Cf. Phillips v. Ben M. Hogan Co.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 594 S.W.2d 39, 41 (Ark. Ct. App. 1980) (}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [W]here a construction contract is substantially performed within the time limit, delay in the completion of minor details
 which does not cause material damage to the project will not subject the builder to liquidated damages.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 ).}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [15]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Our interpretation of the contract comports with case law interpreting liquidated damages clauses.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
As a general rule, courts construe liquidated damages clauses to allow for damages up to the point of substantial completion of the contract, substantial completion being defined as the time which the owner occupies the building.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See Page v. Travis-William County Water Control & Improvement Dist.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 367 S.W.2d 307, 311 (Tex. 1963).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Courts reason that liquidated damages should not accrue beyond the period that the project could be used for its intended purposes.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See id.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 ; }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 see also Stone v. City of Arcola}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 536 N.E.2d 1329, 1338 (Ill. Ct. App. 1989).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
A liquidated damages clause in a construction contract is specifically designed to approximate the owner}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s loss before occupancy, i.e., the damages for delays in completion.}{
\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Perini Corp. v. Great Bay Hotel & Casino, Inc.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 610 A.2d 364, 376 (N.J. 1992).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Once the owner takes possession and uses the building for its intended purpose, it cannot be said that there exists the type of delay for which the liquidated damages clause was intended to remedy.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
See Page}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 367 S.W.2d at 31; }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 see also Phillips}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 594 S.W.2d at 41.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Thus, courts have held that }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 after the date of occupancy, the owner is entitled only to his actual damages,}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  and not liquidated damages.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Page}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 367 S.W.2d at 311.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [16]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Moreover, courts hold that liquidated damages should cease accruing upon substantial completion unless the contract unambiguously provides otherwise.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Perini}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 610 A.2d at 375 (citation omitted).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The contract in the instant case does not unambiguously provide otherwise.}{
\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Therefore, in accordance with the contract language and relevant case law, we interpret the liquidated damages clause to mean that liquidated damages stop accruing upon substantial completion.}{
\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Accordingly, we hold that the trial court did not err in finding that, under the terms of the contract, the liquidated damages were to stop accruing upon substantial completion.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [17]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab 
After making the legal determination that liquidated damages could only be awarded until the point of substantial completion, the trial court was required to determine the point at which the contract at issue was substantially completed.}{\insrsid5394930 
 }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Thus, we must next decide whether the trial court erred in determining that the project was substantially completed at the time the occupancy permit was issued.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Generally, a finding of substantial completion is a question of fact.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See Stone}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 536 N.E.2d at 1338.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
We review factual determinations for clear error.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Yang}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 1998 Guam 9 at }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  4.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
A finding is clearly erroneous when, even though some evidence supports it, the entire record produces the definite and firm conviction that the court below committed a mistake.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 . at }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  7 (citation omitted).}{\insrsid5394930  
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [18]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Substantial completion is defined as the }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 date when construction is sufficiently complete . . . so the owner can occupy or utilize the building.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Russo Farms, Inc. v. Vineland Bd. of Educ.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 675 A.2d 1077, 1093 (N.J. 1996) (internal quotation marks omitted).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
The contract in the instant case similarly defines substantial completion as }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 the Date certified 
by the Architect when construction is sufficiently complete, in accordance with the Contract Documents, }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
so that the Owner or separate contractors can occupy or utilize the Work or a designated portion thereof for the use for which it is intended}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 .}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Appellant}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s Excerpts of Record, tab 11 (General Conditions of the Contract for Construction, Article 8.1.3).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
One factor indicating that a project is substantially completed, i.e., may be used by the owner for its intended purpose, is the issuance of an occupancy permit.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See Russo Farms}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 675 A.2d at 1093;}{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  Miller v. Bourgoin}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 613 A.2d 292, 294-95 (Conn. Ct. App. 1992);}{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  see also}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  Richard H. Lowe & Elisa H. Walthall, }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 When Architects Withhold Certificate of Substantial Completion, and Other Problems}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , C}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 ONSTRUCTION}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  L}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 AW}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 ., Oct. 1999, at 6.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Other factors include: }{
\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
[T]he extent to which the injured party will be deprived of the benefit reasonably expected, the extent to which that party can be adequately compensated for the defici
ency of performance, the extent to which the performing party will suffer forfeiture, the likelihood that the performing party will cure his failure in light of the circumstances and his reasonable assurances, and the extent of good faith and fair dealing
 on the part of the performing party.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Miller}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 613 A.2d at 295.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [19]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab 
Evidence that the occupancy permit was issued February 11, 1994, coupled with the fact that the Averys began to rent the building out soon thereafter, supports a finding that, as of that d
ate, the Averys were able to use the building for its intended purpose.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Moreover, the Averys}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
 ability to rent the building soon after February 11, 1994 indicates that the remaining deficiencies in the building were not so grave so as to deprive them of the benefit they reasonably expected to receive under the contract.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Finally, at the point the occupancy permit was issued, the deficiencies in BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s performance were capable of being adequately remedied by monetary compensation.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 In view of the foregoing facts, we hold that the trial court}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s finding that the work was substantially completed on February 11, 1994 was not clearly erroneous.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Accordingly, we find that the trial court did not err in granting JNOV in favor of BM Co., reducing the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award of liquidated damages.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 B.}{\b\insrsid5394930  }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The Trial Court}{\b\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s Exclusion of BM Co.}{\b\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s Expert Witnesses.}{\b\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930\charrsid5394930 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [20]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab On appeal, BM Co. argues that the trial court erred in excluding two of their expert witnesses.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [A] trial court}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s decision on the admissibility of expert testimony is reviewed for an abuse of discretion or manifest error.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 In re N.A., }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 2001 Guam 7, }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  19;}{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  see also}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Duenas v. Yama}{\i\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s Co.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
, Civ. No. 90-00062A, 1991 WL 255834, at *3 (D. Guam App. Div. Nov. 18, 1991).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
A trial judge abuses his [or] her discretion . . . when the decision is based on an erroneous conclusion of law or where the record contains no evidence on which the judge could have rationally based the decision.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 In re N.A.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 2001 Guam 7 at }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  19 (quoting }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Midsea Indus., Inc. v. HK Eng}{\i\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 g 
Ltd}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 ., 1998 Guam 14, }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  4).}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Furthermore, when reviewing a trial court}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s decision for an abuse of discretion, }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 a reviewing court does not substitute its judgment for that of the trial court.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Instead, we must first have a definite and firm conviction the trial court, after weighing relevant factors, committed clear error of judgment in its conclusion.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 People v. Tuncap}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 1998 Guam 13, }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  12.}{\insrsid5394930  
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [21]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab On August 16, 1995, five years prior to trial, the Averys submitted interrogatories requesting the identity and reports of BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s expert witnesses.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 On April 26, 2000, two weeks prior to trial, BM Co. submitted the names and reports of two rebuttal expert witnesses.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 One expert, Mr. Arce, was prepared to testify that, contrary to the Averys}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  expert testimony that the roo
f of the building was structurally unsound and therefore needed to be repaired, the strength of the allegedly defective roof was structurally adequate and met the design specifications.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Appellant}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s Excerpts of Record, tab G, (Avery}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s Motion to Exclude
, Exhibits A and B, May 3, 2000).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The other expert, Mr. Holwitz, was prepared to testify that the repairs for which the Averys claimed to have spent $67,000.00 for three additional defects }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 66 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  the sidewalk, uneven
 parking slab, and concrete patching on the roof - could have been made for less than $10,000.00.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Appellant}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s Excerpts of Record, tab G, (Avery}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s Motion to Exclude, Exhibits A and B, May 3, 2000).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Mr. Acre}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}
{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s report was one and a half pages long, and Mr. Holwitz}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s report was one page long.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Appellant}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s Excerpts of Record, tab G (Avery}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s Motion to Exclude, Exhibits A and B, May 3, 2000). }{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [22]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab The Averys filed a motion to exclude the experts; which the trial court granted in a Decision and Order filed on May 8, 2000. The court based its exclusion on BM Co.}{
\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s late disclosure of the existence of the experts.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Appellant}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 
'}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s Excerpts of Record, tab E, p. 4 (Decision and Order, May 8, 2000). }{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [23]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Guam Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(4)(A)(i) allows a party to request the identity of proposed expert witnesses through interrogatories.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Guam R. Civ. P. 26(b)(4)(A)(i).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Guam Rule of Civil Procedure 26(e)(1)(B) imposes a duty on parties to supplement interrogatories with the identity of each proposed expert witness and the substance of the expert}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s testimony.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Guam R. Civ. P. 26(e)(1)(B).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
The Rules of Civil Procedure do not specify the appropriate sanction for a violation of GRCP 26(e)(1)(B).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 However, courts operating under the Federal Rules, as enacted i
n Guam, consistently hold that a trial court has the discretion to exclude a witness}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s testimony as a sanction for a party}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s failure to identify the witness in interrogatories or supplemental interrogatories.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Thibeault v. Square D Co.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 960 F.2d 239, 245 (1st Cir. 1992); }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Sowell v. Butcher & Singer, Inc}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 ., 926 F.2d 289, 302 (3d Cir. 1991); }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Murphy v. Magnolia Elec. Power Ass}{\i\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 n}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 639 F.2d 232, 234 (5th Cir. 1981); }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
cf. Davis v. Marathon Oil Co.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 528 F.2d 395, 404 (6th Cir. 1975) (determining that the trial court}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s exclusion of non-expert witnesses comported with the policy underlying Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37); }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 In re N.A.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 2001 Guam 7 at }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  48 (holding that courts may exclude expert testimony in accordance with their inherent powers to manage their dockets).}{
\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [24]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Factors to consider in determining whether a trial court has abused its discretion in excluding a witness include:}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 (1) the prejudice or surprise i
n fact of the party against whom the excluded witnesses would have testified, (2) the ability of that party to cure that prejudice, (3) the extent to which waiver of the rule against calling unlisted witnesses would disrupt the orderly and efficient trial
 of the case or of other cases in the court, and (4) bad faith or willfulness in failing to comply with the court}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s order.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Meyers v. Pennypack Woods Home Ownership Ass}{\i\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 n}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 559 F.2d 894, 904-05 (3d Cir. 1977), }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 overruled on other grounds}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 by Goodman v. Lukens Steel Co.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 777 F.2d 113 (3d Cir. 1985).}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The importance of the underlying testimony is another factor in determining whether the witness was properly excluded.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 . at 904; 
}{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 see also Sowell}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 926 F.2d at 302.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [25]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab In the instant case, the trial court bal
anced several factors and found that, while BM Co. did not act in bad faith, BM Co. was ultimately responsible for informing its new counsel of these experts so as to allow BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s counsel to supplement the interrogatories.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The court further found that t
he Averys were unable to effectively review and prepare to rebut the testimony of the experts because BM Co. notified the Averys of the experts}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  identities only two weeks prior to trial.
}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Therefore, the Averys would be prejudiced by the admission of the experts.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Finally, the court found that a continuance of the case would be inappropriate due to the fact that the case had been pending for five years and was continued several times during that time period.}{\insrsid5394930  
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [26]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Notwithstanding the trial court}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s balancing, the facts of the instant case support our conclusion that the trial court abused its discretion by excluding the witnesses.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Meyers v. Pennypack Woods Home Ownership Association}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  is of particular relevance to the analysis of the instant issue.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 In }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Meyers}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
, the trial court set a date to submit a list of all expected witnesses.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See Meyers}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 559 F.2d at 903.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
The plaintiff filed a list of witnesses by the designated date and sent a letter to the defendant informing the defendant that the plaintiff wished to supplement the list with the names of three newly discovered fact witnesses.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 .}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 At trial, the plaintiff attempted to call the witnesses and the trial court sustained the defendant}{
\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s objection to the testimony, excluding the witnesses.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 . at 904.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The appellate court reversed, holding that the exclusion was an abuse of discretion.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 . at 905.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The appellate court recognized that }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
the exclusion of critical evidence is an }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 extreme sanction}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  . . . not normally to be imposed in the absence of showing of willful deception or }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 flagrant disregard}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  of a court order by the proponent of the evidence.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 . (citations omitted).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
The court found that there was no showing that the plaintiff}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s action in failing to timely identify the witnesses was made in bad faith or was willful.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Further, the court found that allowing t
he testimony would not have prejudiced the defendant because the defendant was informed of the witnesses three weeks prior to trial, which was an adequate amount of time to conduct discovery regarding these witnesses in preparation for their proposed test
imony, and which would have minimized the alleged prejudice and surprise at trial.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 .}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Finally, the appellate court determined that the orderly and efficient trial of the case and other cases would not have been compromised by a less drastic and more 
appropriate sanction, such as ordering a few days of adjournment to allow the defendant to prepare with costs taxed to the plaintiff.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 .}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The court}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s holding was made in light of its finding that the witnesses}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
 testimony may have led to a different outcome, and thus the exclusion was not harmless.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 . at 904.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [27]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab The }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Meyers}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  court focused on the effect of the evidence on the outcome of the case, the proponent}{
\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s actions, and whether it was flagrant or willful, the prejudice to the other party, and the availability of less drastic measures measured against the court}{
\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s interest in efficiency.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 . at 904-05; }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 see also Murphy}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 639 F.2d at 234-35 (holding that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding the appellant}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s expert }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
rebuttal witnesses}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  because the fact that the witnesses intended to rebut the appellee}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s evidence shows that the appellee would not have been prejudiced and the nature of the evidence }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
struck at the heart}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  of the appellant}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s case and was therefore essential evidence).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The case relied upon by the trial court, }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Tibeault v. Square D Co.}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , similarly identifies the importance of the testimony as a relevant factor, and further recognizes the proponent}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s good faith as an important factor to consider when determining an appropriate sanction.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Tibeault}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 960 F.2d at 244-45, 245 n.4. }{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [28]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab In the instant case, the
 trial court did not discuss or attribute weight to the fact that (1) BM Co. did not act in bad faith, (2) the Averys would not be prejudiced or surprised because BM Co. intended to call the witnesses to }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 rebut }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 the testimony of the Averys}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  witnesses, (3) th
ere were still two weeks until trial in which the Averys could review and prepare for the testimony, and (4) the expert testimony was important to rebut testimony on the issue of damages.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Cf. Meyers}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 559 F.2d at 903-05; }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Murphy}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 639 F.2d at 234-35.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Accord
ingly, in failing to adequately consider the above facts, the trial court failed to weigh the relevant factors in reaching its judgment.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [29]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Furthermore, we find the most compelling factors in determining whether to exclude a witness to be 
the importance of the testimony, the likelihood of prejudice, and the possibility of other sanctions, such as a short continuance with costs taxed to the proponent.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Cf. Meyers}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 559 F.2d at 905.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 We agree that preparing for the cross-examination of an opponent}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s expert witness is one of counsel}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s most important responsibilities, thus necessitating the timely disclosure of that witness}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  identity and opinions.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See In re N.A., }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 2001 Guam 7 at }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  48.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Moreover, the tri
al court is clearly in the best position to decide whether alternative remedies, such as a continuance, are feasible and appropriate in each individual case.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Cf.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Davis}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 528 F.2d at 403.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 However, we find that in the absence of an incurable prejudice to th
e opposing party, trial judges should err on the side of affording the parties the opportunity to fully present the case on the merits.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Because, in the instant case, (1) the expert testimony was valuable in rebutting the Averys}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  claims for a significant a
mount of damages, thus favoring the imposition of a less drastic sanction, (2) the witnesses were rebuttal witnesses thus negating a finding of prejudice, and (3) the trial was still two weeks away, we have a definite and firm conviction that the trial co
urt committed a clear error of judgment in reaching its conclusion.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See, e.g., Meyers}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 559 F.2d at 904-05; }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Murphy}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 639 F.2d at 234-35.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Accordingly, we hold that, under the facts of this case, the trial court abused its discretion in excluding BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 
'}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s expert witnesses.}{\insrsid5394930  
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 C.}{\b\insrsid5394930  }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The Trial Court}{\b\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s Denial of BM Co.}{\b\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s Post-Verdict Motions.}{\b\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid5394930 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [30]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab On appeal, BM Co. argues that the trial court erred in failing to enter judgment in their favor, or grant a new trial, as to the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s award of damages for: (1) repair costs for construction defects (for a defective roof panel, sidewalk, parking lot, roof deck, drain clean-out collars, vent pipe inverts, and door); (2) lost rental income; and (3) the indemnity claim.}{\insrsid5394930  
}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 BM Co. also argues that a new trial is warranted because the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award was excessive and the result of passion or prejudice.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [31]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab We review a trial court}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s denial of a new trial for abuse of discretion.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See J.J. Moving Services v. Sanko Bussan (Guam) Co.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 1998 Guam 19, }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  14, 26.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 We review the denial of a motion for JNOV }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 de novo}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 .}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Leon Guerrero}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
, 1999 Guam 9, at }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
 11, 20.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 When reviewing either the denial of a motion for a new trial or a denial of a motion for JNOV, the inquiry is }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 whether the verdict is either supported by substantial evidence or whether the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s decision is against the clear weight of the evidence.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Id}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 . at }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  21.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
We will not disturb the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s verdict or find that a new trial is warranted if the verdict is based on }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 relevant evidence which reasonable minds might accept as adequate to support a conclusion even if it is possible to draw two inconsistent conclusions from the evidence.}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 . at }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  20.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 1.}{\b\insrsid5394930  }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The Jury}{\b\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s Award for Construction Defects}{\b\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid5394930 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [32]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab BM Co. makes two arguments in support of its contention that the trial court erred in denying their motion for a new trial or JNOV as to the jury}{
\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award of damages for construction defects.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 First, BM Co. argues that the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s use of the }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 cost to repair}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  measure of damages was erroneous and that the proper measure should have been the diminution of value of the property with the defects.}
{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Second, BM Co. argues that even if the cost of repairs is used as the measure, the Averys failed to meet its burden to adequately prove t
he cost of repairing the defects and that these costs were reasonable.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [33]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab With regard to BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s first argument, we reiterate that this court generally declines to hear issues presented for the first time on appeal.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See Dumaliang v. Silan}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 2000 Guam 24, }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  12.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
BM Co. did not previously raise the issue of the proper measure of damages for construction defects, and has therefore waived that argument on appeal.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 . }{
\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [34]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab As for the second argument, where the measure of damages is cost of repairs, the party seeking damages has the burden to }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 prove by a preponderance of the evidence the necessary and reasonable cost to complete the building in accord with the original tenor of the agreement.}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Jones v. Honchell}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
, 470 N.E.2d 219, 222 (Ohio Ct. App. 1984).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The burden then shifts to the defaulting party }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 to show the unreasonableness of these expenditures.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Centex-Rooney Constr. Co. v. Martin Canty}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 706 So. 2d 20, 27 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Moreover, the exact amount of damages need not be proven, and a jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award will stand so long as there is a reasonable basis in the evidence for the amount awarded.}{\insrsid5394930  }
{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Id. }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 at 28.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
So long as the award is not based on speculation and conjecture and a prudent impartial person can estimate the amount with reasonable certainty, the award should be left standing.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
See Senato v. Querimit}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , Civ. No. 93-00050A, 1994 WL 550053, at *1 (D. Guam App. Div. Oct. 3, 1994).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Testimonial evidence regarding the cost of repairs is sufficient to support a jury award that is consistent with such testimony.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See, e.g., Jim Mahoney, Inc. v. Galokee Corp.}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 522 P.2d 428, 432-35 (Kan. 1974). }{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [35]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab In the instant case, the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award was based on evidence presented at trial.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The estimated cost to repair the roof was based on trial testimony by Mr. Avery on May 15, 2000.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 During direct examination, the Averys}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}
{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  counsel posited the following question to Mr. Avery: }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
What is it your understanding of what it}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s going to cost you to replace that roof panel?}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Transcript, vol. V, p. 168 (Trial, May 15, 2000).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Mr. Avery responded: }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 A hundred and sixty-thousand dollars.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Transcript, vol. V, p. 168 (Trial, May 15, 2000).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The Averys}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  project engineer and expert witness, Mr. John Sherman, also testified that he estimated the cost to replace the roof panel to be $160,000.00.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  Transcript, vol. VI, p. 204 (Trial, May 16, 2000).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Mr. 
Avery testified that he hired a contractor to repair the sidewalk, parking lot, and roof deck, for a total cost of $67,000.00.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Transcript, vol. V, p. 152 (Trial, May 15, 2000).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Therefore, the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award for those defects was supported by the eviden
ce; however, because we previously held that the trial court erred in excluding BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s expert witnesses who were offered to rebut the Averys}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  evidence as to those defects, we accordingly hold that the trial court erred in denying B.M. Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s motion for a new trial as to that aspect of the jury}{
\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award.}{\insrsid5394930  
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [36]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab 
As for the defective door, drain clean out collars, and vent pipe inverts, Mr. Avery testified at trial that he thought it would cost $1,200.00 to fix the drain collars, $3,000 to fix the pipe inverts, and }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 around $5,000}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  to fix the door.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Transcript, vol. V, pp. 174, 177, 178 (Trial, May 15, 2000).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The jury}{
\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award was consistent with the amounts testified to.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Thus, the testimony regarding the repair costs for those construction defects formed a sufficient basis to support the award.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Cf. Jim Mahoney, Inc.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
, 522 P.2d at 432-35.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Consequently, the trial court did not err in denying BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s motion for
 a new trial or JNOV as to that aspect of the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award.}{\insrsid5394930  
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 2.}{\b\insrsid5394930  }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The Jury}{\b\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s Award for Lost Rentals.}{\b\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid5394930 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [37]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab BM Co. argues that the trial court erred in denying its motion for JNOV regarding the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s award for lost rentals.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 BM Co. claims that because the liquidated damages included lost rentals, the award for lost rentals must be overturned as a matter of law.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 We agree.}{\insrsid5394930  
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [38]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab A party may recover actual damages in addition to liquidated damages if the actual damages were not contemplated under the liquidated damages clause.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See Moses v. Autuono}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 47 So. 925, 926 (Fla. 1908); }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Meyer v. Hansen}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 373 N.W.2d 392, 395 (N.D. 1985).}{
\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See generally J.E. Hathaway & Co. v. United States}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 249 U.S. 460, 464 (1919).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
It is axiomatic that damages for breach of contract are intended to put the injured party in the same position, and }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 not }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
a better position, than he would be had the contract not been breached.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Cantrell v. Knox County Bd. of Educ.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , No. E1999-01557-SC-R1
1CL, 2001 WL 957456, at *2 (Tenn. Aug, 23, 2001).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Accordingly, an award of actual damages that are contemplated under the liquidated damages provision is not allowed as it would amount to an improper double recovery for the same element of damages.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
See Hillsborough County Aviation Auth. v. Cone Bros. Contracting Co.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 285 So. 2d 619, 621 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Thus, the instant issue is whether the parties intended that the liquidated damages clause include lost rentals.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 If so, then the Averys would
 not be entitled to recover both liquidated damages and lost rentals.}{\insrsid5394930  
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [39]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab In the contract at issue, the liquidated damages clause was designed to replace damages caused by a delay in the construction.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Appellee}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s Supplemental Excerpts of Record, tab 10, p.1 (Liquidated Damages Clause, Supplement to Agreement).}{
\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
As a rule, the measure of damages for failure to complete the work within the time fixed by the contract is the value of the use of the building.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 This }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 62 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 use}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  of the building is ordinarily its }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 rental}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 value}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  for the period of delay.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Ryan v. Thurmond}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 481 S.W.2d 199, 206 (Tex. Civ. App. 1972); }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 O
lson v. Quality-Pak Co}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 ., 469 P.2d 45, 49 (Idaho 1970); }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Muller v. Light}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 538 S.W.2d 487, 488 (Tex. Civ. App. 1976); }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
cf. Int}{\i\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 l Fid. Ins. Co. v. County of Chautauqua}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 667 N.Y.S.2d 172, 173-74 (App. Div. 1997) (providing that }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 lost income}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  is attributable to the delay in completing the project).}{\cs15\super\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid3019543 \chftn }{\insrsid3019543  }{\fs20\insrsid3019543 
Other damages that are attributable to delay in completion are the expenses relating to extending a construction loan and interest paid on a construction loan.  }{\i\fs20\insrsid3019543 See }{\fs20\insrsid3019543 5 }{\fs18\insrsid3019543 AM}{
\fs20\insrsid3019543 . J}{\fs18\insrsid3019543 UR. 2d }{\i\fs18\insrsid3019543 Proof}{\i\fs20\insrsid3019543  of Facts}{\fs20\insrsid3019543  371 }{\fs20\insrsid3019543 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f36\fs20}}}{
\fs20\insrsid3019543  11 (1975).     
\par }}}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [40]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Therefore, lost rentals are generally recoverable for a contractor}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s delay.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Thus, to the extent that the liquidated damages provision of the instant construction contract was intended to remedy BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s delay to completion, it is properly interpreted as including lost rentals.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 In the absence of a separate contract claus
e that specifically allows for recovery of lost rentals, the Averys should not be able to recover lost rentals in addition to liquidated damages.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See Hathaway}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
, 249 U.S. at 464 (}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 There is no reason why parties co
mpetent to contract may not agree that certain elements of damages difficult to estimate shall be covered by a provision for liquidated damages and that other elements shall be ascertained in the usual manner.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 )}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [41]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Accordingly, we find that the trial court erred in failing to grant BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s motion for JNOV as to the jury
}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award of lost rentals.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s award of lost rentals duplicates the liquidated damages award and is erroneous as a matter of law.}{\insrsid5394930  
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 3.}{\b\insrsid5394930  }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The Jury}{\b\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s Award for the Indemnity Claim.}{\b\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid5394930 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [42]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Prior to filing the instant action, the Averys were sued by a neighboring landowner Besta Market (hereinafter }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL
 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Besta}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
) for damages to their building suffered as a result of the construction of the warehouse.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
The Averys and Besta agreed to a stipulated judgment which was entered in favor of Besta in the amount of $100,000.00.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 In a counterclaim in the insta
nt action, the Averys claimed indemnification for amounts paid to Besta in accordance with the stipulated judgment.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
The jury found for the Averys and included in its damages award the claimed amount of $100,000.00.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 BM Co. argues that the trial court erred in not directing a verdict as to Averys}{
\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  indemnity claim.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 BM Co. contends that it cannot be held to indemnify the Averys because it was neither notified of Besta}{
\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s claim against the Averys, nor given the opportunity to defend against the claim.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  Appellant}{
\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s Opening Brief, pp. 31-39.}{\cs15\super\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid3019543 \chftn }{\insrsid3019543  }{\fs20\insrsid3019543 There is evidence that BM Co. knew of the claim.  }{\i\fs20\insrsid3019543 See}{\fs20\insrsid3019543 
 Transcript, vol. II, pp. 152-60 (Trial, May 10, 2000).  At trial, Mr. Kang of BM Co. testified that Besta called him as a witne
ss in the Besta Market v. Averys trial for the limited purpose of identifying a document.  Thus, BM Co. was made aware of the claim through efforts of Besta, not the Averys.  In fact, Mr. Kang further testified that the Averys never notified BM Co. of the
 Besta claim, nor did the Averys ask BM Co. to participate in the defense at the trial.  }{\i\fs20\insrsid3019543 See id}{\fs20\insrsid3019543 
.  Mere knowledge of the existence of an action is insufficient notice of the claim for purposes indemnification, and the indemnitee must show that it affirmatively made the indemnitor aware that it sought the indemnitor}{\fs20\insrsid14756782 '}{
\fs20\insrsid3019543 s help in defending the claim.  }{\i\fs20\insrsid3019543 See J.W. Theisen v. County of Los Angeles}{\fs20\insrsid3019543 , 343 P.2d 1001, 1007 (Cal. Ct. App. 1959), }{\i\fs20\insrsid3019543 superceded on other grounds by }{
\fs20\insrsid3019543 352 P.2d 529 (1960).}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The Averys contend that the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s award should not be disturbed because there was evidence at trial that BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s negligence caused the damages suffered by Besta and that the parties agreed that BM Co. would indemnify the Averys for damages caused by BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s negligence.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [43]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab The construction contract contained an indemnity provision in which BM Co. was responsible for indemnifying the Averys }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst 
SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 from and against all claims, damages, losses, and expenses . . . [if suc
h claim] is caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission of . . . [BM Co.].}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Appellee}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s Supplemental Excerpts of Record, tab 11, p. 11.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
The Guam statute governing express contracts for indemnity is found in Chapter 30 of Title 18 of the Guam Code Annotated.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Title 18 GCA }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  30107(6) provides: }{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 In the interpretation of a contract of indemnity, the following rules are to be applied, unless a contrary intent
ion appears: . . . If the person indemnifying, whether he is a principal or surety in the agreement, has not reasonable notice of the action or proceeding against the person indemnified, or is not allowed to control its defense, judgment against the latte
r is only presumptive against the former.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Title 18 GCA }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  30107(6) (1998).}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 It is therefore necessary to determine whether a stipulated judgment is the equivalent of a }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 judgment}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  as provided for in section 30107(6).}{\insrsid5394930  
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [44]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab In determining whether consent judgments are encompassed under 18 GCA }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  30107(6), we must first look to language of the statute.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Pangelinan v. Gutierrez}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 2000 Guam 11, }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  23 (}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 In cases involving statutory construction, the plain language of a statute must be the starting point.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 ).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The statute plainly addresses the effect of }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 judgments.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
While a stipulated judgment has the force of a jud
gment after trial in regards to collection of judgments after trial, that is, it may be collected upon in the manner prescribed for executing court judgments, all other aspects of consent judgments resemble settlements, as opposed to judgments after trial
.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 For instance, in }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Commercial Union Assurance Co. v. Am. Cent. Ins. Co.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
, 68 Cal. 430 (1886), the court characterized a settlement as devoid of }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
adjudication of the question of liability,}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  and in which the settling defendant }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 acknowledge[s] its liability by abandoning all defenses to it . . . .}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 . at 432-33.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Similarl
y, a consent judgment is defined as }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
[a] judgment, the provisions and terms of which are settled and agreed to by the parties to the action.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
 B}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 LACK}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 S}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  L}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 AW}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  D}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
ICTIONARY}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 6th ed.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Seen in this light, in contrast to a judgment after trial, parties to a consent or stipulated judgment do not adjudicate the question of liability, but rather, the parties settle the claim, and the defendant admits liability by abandoning all defens
es to the claim and judgment is entered in favor of the plaintiff accordingly.}{\insrsid5394930  
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [45]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Moreover, unlike judgments after trial, consent or stipulated judgments are generally not appealable.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See White v. Comm}{
\i\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 r of Internal Revenue}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 776 F.2d 976, 977-78 (11th Cir. 1985).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
The consent-to judgment doctrine instructs that, in general, }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 a party may not appeal a consent judgment.
}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Norgart v. Upjohn Co.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 981 P.2d 79, 90, 21 Cal.
 4th 383, 400, 87 Cal. Rptr. 2d 453, 465 (1999) (citation omitted); }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 see also White}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 776 F.2d at 977; }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Sauer v. Rhoades}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 62 N.W.2d 634, 635 (Mich. 1954).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The rationale underlying the rule was succinctly explained as follows by Judge Posner in}{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
 Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) v. Edgar}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 99 F.3d 261 (7th Cir. 1996):}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
The purpose of a consent judgment is to resolve a dispute without further litigation, and so would be defeated or at least impaired by an appeal.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The presumption, there
fore, is that the consent operates as a wavier of the right to appeal.}{\insrsid5394930  
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 . at 262.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [46]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Thus, a consent judgment is more properly characterized as a settlement in that both are meant to be a binding agreement on the merits of the claim,
 most important, the issue of liability.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 This similarity between a consent judgment and a settlement is revealed by the exceptions to the consent-to-judgment doctrine.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Consent judgments are only appealable where (1) the parties manifest an intent that th
e judgment be appealable, such as a reservation of the right to appeal, (2) an attack on the judgment alleges that the court entering the judgment lacked jurisdiction, or (3) an attack on the judgment implicates a defect in formation of the agreement, whi
ch would nullify the agreement, such as a lack of consent, fraud, collusion, mistake, or misrepresentation.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 .;}{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
 Coughlin v. Regan}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 768 F.2d 468, 469 (1st Cir. 1985);}{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  Mitchelson v. Sandstrom (In re Estate of Sandstrom)}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 580 P.2d 1310, 1315 (Kan. 1978); }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Henke v. Peoples State Bank}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 6 S.W.3d 717, 720 (Tex. App. 1999); }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 White}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 776 F.2d at 977.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Thus, like a settlement, a party to a consent or stipulated judgment cannot later attack portions of the judgment that represent the parties}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
 agreement regarding the }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 merits}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  of the plaintiff}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s claim.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
In effect, because the judgment is conclusive on the issue of liability, as a party to a stipulated judgment, the defendant waives the right to assert on appeal that the facts do not support the plaintiff}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s claim for relief.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [47]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Further, in the indemnity context, courts equate stipulated judgments with settlements.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 In }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Lamb v. Belt Casualty Co.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 40 P.2d 311, 3 Cal. App. 2d 624 (Ct. App. 1935), the court iterated the rule that a person bound by contract to indemnify another is }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 bound by the }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 result of a litigation}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
 to which such other is a party, provided he had notice of the suit and an opportunity to control and manage it.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 . at 314, 3 Cal. App. 2d at 631 (citation omitted) (emphasis added).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
The court then differentiated that rule with the rule governing indemnification cases wherein }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
there is no trial and no judgment establishing the liability of the [indemnitee] . . . .}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 .}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The court provided that the latter includes cases where the indemnitee is party to a }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 settlement, }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 or a judgment rendered upon stipulation of such a settlement}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 .}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 .; }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 cf. Six v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 558 N.W.2d 205, 207 (Iowa 1997) (using the terms }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 stipulated judgment}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  and }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 settlement}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  interchangeably).}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [48]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Thus, although stipulated judgments have the force of judgments, and can be executed upon like a
ny judgment of the court, they are more akin to settlements and are more properly characterized as such.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Title 18 GCA }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  30106 speaks only to }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 judgments,}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  and not both judgments and settlements.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Viewing stipulated judgments as settlements, then under a plain reading of the statute, it does not fall within the ambit of 18 GCA }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  30107(6).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Therefore, section 30107(6) does not provide the rule for stipulated judgments, and the Averys cannot get the benefit of the evidentiary presumption set forth in that section.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [49]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Our interpretation that judgments do not include stipulated judgments in the context of the indemnity statute furthers the policy against collusion.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Under a stipulated judgment between a third party and an indemnitee, the ultimate payer is the indemnitor.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 In the situation, such as here, where the third party
 and the indemnitee are engaged in a separate dispute to establish liability and damages, and the indemnitor is not provided notice of the dispute and the opportunity to defend, the likelihood of collusion is high.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 This is unlike the case where a judgment is obtained after a contested proceeding.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [50]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Because 18 GCA }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
 30107(6) does not provide the rule for stipulated judgments, the statute is inapplicable in the instant case.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Therefore, we must next determine the proper rule to apply under the facts of this case.}{
\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 There are two lines of authority in this regard.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
One line of cases provides that a failure to prove proper and timely notice to the indemnitor is a condition precedent to recovery in an indemnity action, and thus acts as a complete bar to maintaining the action.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See United Services Auto. Ass}{\i\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 n v. Barger}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 910 F.2d 321, 324-25 (6th Cir. 1990) (applying Ohio law).}{
\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The second line of cases provides that in an action for indemnification the indemnitee has the burden of proving three elements: }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 (1) that he was liable; (2) that the settlement was reasonable; and (3) that his liability was of such a character that, in spite of it, he may reco
ver over against the defendant.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Jennings v. United States}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 374 F.2d 983, 987 (4th Cir. 1967).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 We adopt the latter rule.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
If an indemnitee settles a claim, he should be able to successfully seek indemnification if he did not pay the claim as a volunteer and the indemnitor is contractually obligated to indemnify him.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
The three elements in a claim for indemnification, set forth in the second line of cases, properly ensure that the indemnitee did not act as a volunteer in agreeing to and satisfying the judgment.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
In a case where the indemnitee could successfully prove the above-mentioned three elements, it would be a windfall to the indemnitor if he were able to avoid his contractual obligation simply by virtue of the fact that he was not notified of the claim.}{
\insrsid5394930  
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [51]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Having set forth the appropriate rule for this case, the success of BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s challenge to the jury}{
\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award for the Averys}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
 indemnity claim rests on whether the Averys met their burden to prove the elements of their claim, which were: (1) that the Averys were legally liable to Besta; (2) that the stipulated amount was reasonable; and (3) that the Averys}{
\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  liability was of such a character that, in spite of it, they may recover against BM Co.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See Jennings}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 374 F.2d at 987.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 A review of the record reveals that the Averys provided evidence regarding the first and third elements.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The remaining issue is whether the Averys proved that the settlement amount was reasonable. }{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [52]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Contracts of indemnity are interpreted to exclude losses }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}
{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 which the indemnitee is not liable to a third person or for which the indemnitee improperly pays.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Peter Cully & Assoc. v. Superior Court}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 13 Cal. Rptr. 624, 629, 10 Cal. App. 4th 1484, 1493 (Ct. App. 1992).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Amounts paid as a volunteer are improperly paid, and are therefore not recoverable in an indemnity action.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 .}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
In an indemnity action wherein the indemnitee pays the claim pursuant to an agreement with the third party, such as a settlement or stipulated judgment, the critical question is whether the underlying agreement was reasonable, and specifically, }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 whether the settling indemnitee acted unreasonably by paying too much, thereby acting as a volunteer.}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Heppler v. J.M. Peters Co.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
, 87 Cal. Rptr. 2d 497, 514, 73 Cal. App. 4th 1265, 1284 (Ct. App. 1999).}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [53]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab The reasonableness of a settlement is determined by }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 comparing the nature of the injury and the damages incurred to the size of the settlement.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{
\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Int}{\i\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 l Minerals & Chem. Corp. v. Avon Products Inc.}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 889 S.W.2d 111, 118 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994).}{
\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Evidence probative of the reasonableness of a settlement includes testimony or other proof regarding the cost of remedying the injury caused by the indemnitor}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s alleged negligence.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See Heppler}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 87 Cal. Rptr. 2d at 514, 73 Cal. App. 4th at 1284.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 In the instant case, there was no evidence regarding the reasonableness of the amount agreed to in the stipulated judgment, that is, whethe
r the amount was unreasonably high. A review of the record reveals that the Averys did not present evidence proving the actual damages suffered by Besta or the amounts necessary to remedy Besta}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s alleged injury, thus, there was no evidence that the jury co
uld use to determine whether the $100,000.00 paid in accordance with the stipulated judgment accurately reflected the injury, or put another way, was unreasonably high.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Because the burden was on the Averys to establish reasonableness, and this element of the claim for indemnity was not proven, the Averys failed to prove their }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 prima facie}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
 claim for indemnification.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Accordingly, the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s award for the indemnity claim was in error, and the trial court therefore erred in denying BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s motion for JNOV as to this aspect of the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award. }{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 D.}{\b\insrsid5394930  }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 The Jury}{\b\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s Overall Award.}{\b\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid5394930 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [54]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Finally, BM Co. argues that they are entitled to a new trial because the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s award was the product of passion or prejudice.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 BM Co. contends that because the jury found in favor of 
the Averys on all issues, and because the damages were not supported by the evidence, including the excessive liquidated damages award, it is clear that the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s decision was made under the influence of passion and prejudice.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 We disagree.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [55]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab Initially, we note that BM Co. did not raise this issue previously and is therefore improperly before the court on appeal.}{\insrsid5394930  }{
\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See Dumaliang}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 2000 Guam 24 at }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  12.
}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Moreover, we find BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s argument to be completely lacking in merit.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Pursuant to 7 GCA }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
 21501, a new trial may be granted if the damages award was excessive and appeared to be given }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
under influence of passion or prejudice,}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
 and the award materially affects the substantial rights of the parties.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Title 7 GCA }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f36\fs24}}
}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  21501(4) (1994).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 When a party seeks a 
new trial based on a claim that damages are excessive and a result of passion, a reviewing court will not determine the amount it would have awarded as compensation for the injured party; rather, we must determine whether the jury}{
\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award is supported by the record when viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See Barrett v. Larson}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 , 846 P.2d 1012, 1018 (Mont. 1993) (citations omitted).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 As shown earlier in this opinion, the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s award for the cost to repair the construction defects was supported by the evidence; and our reversal of part of the award is grounded on the trial court}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s erroneous exclusion of BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s expert witnesses.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 See id}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
. (holding that because the damage award reflected the testimony and exhibits adduced at trial, it was supported by the evidence and therefore not a result of passion or prejudice).}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
Furthermore, while the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award of liquidated damages, the indemnity claim, and lost rentals may have been improper as a matter of law; the legal nature of their error n
egates an inference that the award was influenced by passion or prejudice.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 We therefore reject BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s argument that a new trial should be granted on the ground that the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award was the product of passion or prejudice.}{\insrsid5394930  
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 IV.}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 [56]}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab We find that the trial court did not commit error in reducing the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '
}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s award of liquidated damages.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 However, we hold that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{
\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s proposed expert witnesses and, therefore, a new trial is warranted on the issue of damages for the defects in the roof panel, sidewalk, parking lot, and roof deck.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
We find that the court properly denied BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s post-verdict motions as to the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s award for all other construction defects.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Finally, we hold that the jury}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 s awa
rd of damages for the indemnity claim and lost profits were erroneous as a matter of law, therefore, the trial court erred in denying BM Co.}{\insrsid14756782\charrsid5394930 '}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 
s motion for JNOV as to those aspects of the award.}{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 In accordance with the foregoing, we }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 AFFIRM }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 in part, }{
\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 REVERSE}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  in part, and }{\b\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 REMAND}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930  for proceedings consistent with this Opinion. }{\insrsid5394930 
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 RICHARD H. BENSON\tab \tab \tab \tab }{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 JOHN A. MANGLONA
\par Justice }{\i\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Pro Tempore}{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 \tab \tab \tab \tab }{\insrsid5394930  }{\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 Designated Justice}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid5394930 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5394930 {\insrsid3019543\charrsid5394930 F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO
\par Chief Justice (Acting)}{\insrsid5394930 
\par }}