to exercise care’ to avoid the harm.”). Gilmore also presented evidence from which a jury could reasonably conclude that the Duderstadts overreached and abused their “insider” position as landlords when they increased the rent unilaterally without informing him, after leading Gilmore to believe, through the company’s financial records, that the rent would remain $15,000 per month while Gilmore was striving to make a 10% net profit during the trial period. Gilmore also presented expert testimony that the Duderstadts’ failure to accrue back-due rent on the company’s financial statements had the effect of misrepresenting and overstating Laubo’s net profits by approximately $90,000. Cf. Golden Cone Concepts, Inc. v. Villa Linda Mall, Ltd., 113 N.M. 9, 14-15, 820 P.2d 1323, 1328-29 (1991) (<HOLDING>). The jury could reasonably infer the
holding that misrepresentations about profitability of business made recklessly with intent to deceive supported award of punitive damages holding a court may not award punitive damages holding that the record supported the district courts award of damages holding that conduct must be beyond the fraud which supported compensatory damages to award punitive damages holding that an award for punitive damages must be supported by clear unequivocal and convincing evidence