Joel G. Wiersum and Darlene Wiersum, Appellants v. Paul R. Harder — Winfree, J., Concurring in Part and Dissenting…

Summary

Justice Winfree agreed that the judgment should be reversed, but joined Justice Carpeneti's reasoning and otherwise agreed with the per curiam opinion. Winfree noted that the parties apparently agreed treble damages applied to restoration damages and that the upper limit of restoration damages was an important issue, but would have the parties litigate that issue in the superior court on remand because it was not preserved below. Justice Stowers, dissenting, would have upheld the jury's restoration damages award and rejected a new trial on damages; Chief Justice Fabe would have limited damages by remittitur; and Justice Carpeneti would have required a new trial on all damages issues, including whether restoration damages were appropriate.