Court holds damages proofs were adequate and not "speculative."
Citizens Bank sued Scott Withers and Withers Steel Service Center, alleging that Withers' father had fraudulently transferred to Withers property in which Citizens was owed a security interest. Citizens obtained a default judgment and a hearing was held to assess damages. Withers argued that the judgment resulting from this hearing was mistaken in its damage computation because it lacked precision and was based on speculation about future profits. The Court of Appeals upheld the judgment, noting that the court "calculated ...damages as precisely and reasonably as possible."