In a May 17 memo to the utility’s board of directors, Tampa Bay Water general counsel Barrie S. Buenaventura stated: “We believe Tampa Bay Water should be granted a new trial because the jury’s verdict is against the clear weight of evidence presented at trial and because the Court erroneously excluded evidence that the jury should have been allowed to consider.”

Richard Harrison, who served as Tampa Bay Water’s lead attorney at trial, filed the motion with the U.S. District Court in Tampa, where the case was originally heard. The motion maintains that there were “numerous errors in the exclusion and admission of evidence.” Some of the arguments for a new trial included in TBW’s motion include:

•詹姆斯·惠特莫尔（James Whittemore）法官不当排除了与HDR对路堤建设的检查有关的证据。坦帕湾水（Tampa Bay Water）指出，这一证据将使它能够反驳HDR的理论，即路堤建造得太厚。

•TBW指出，在重定向证词期间，她说保护层“非常厚”时，它被阻止询问公用事业雇员的意思。

•法官将2008年的备忘录排除在HDR主管中的一份2008年的备忘录中时，他对工程师设计的潜在业务影响表示担忧，因为该工程师的设计被认为是对水库裂缝的责备。（哈里森在对TBW总经理杰拉尔德·塞伯（Gerald Seeber）的询问期间在审判中对备忘录发表了讲话，并将其作为他结束论点的一部分提到。）

•法院在审判的反驳阶段不正确地阻止了两名坦帕湾水的证人作证。

•该公用事业公司的律师认为，HDR证人在他的证词中被允许使用的照片不当。他们还引用了其他相关照片，这些照片被“过早披露”。

Tampa Bay Water’s motion also asserts that Judge Whittemore’s denial of a request for a “jury view” of the reservoir resulted in an exclusion of evidence.

根据该动议，TBW律师在审判前寻求访问“数月”的水库，但被拒绝。在审判期间，其中一名陪审员向惠特莫尔法官提出了一个问题，询问是否应该访问水库。在考虑了陪审员的要求之后，法官再次削减了前往Lithia设施的旅行，理由是他对陪审员安全的关注是他决定的一个因素。

On this matter, the utility’s motion states: “TBW appreciates that the jury view is a matter within the Court’s sound discretion. But if there were ever a case in which the refusal to permit a jury view were an abuse of that discretion, this is the case. No case more compellingly demonstrates that ‘If a picture is worth a thousand words, then the real thing is worth a thousand pictures.’”

此外，哈里森认为：“在这种情况下，为什么要负责解决复杂和有争议的事实问题的陪审员应该是唯一不允许看到水库的人？”

最后，该动议指出法官通过允许HDR提供证词和其自身关于破裂原因理论的证据而犯了错误。

After a month-long trial in Tampa, a federal jury ruled on April 10 in favor of HDR, and found the engineer had no liability for damages related to the cracking at the reservoir. At trial, Tampa Bay Water had asked for $73.25 million in damages, dating back to 2005. HDR has estimated that with the accrual of interest, that figure would have ballooned to more than $140 million.

According to Buenaventura’s memo to the TBW board, HDR’s response to the utility’s motion for a new trial is due to the court by June 4.