The court held that the entire $826,473.50 should not have been deleted because Paquet was entitled to an equitable adjustment. (Note: equitable means fair and impartial) The trial court reasoned that Paquet had deleted approximately $376,000 from the non-bridge painting portion of the contract to reflect the difference between the total of the pay items pertaining to bridge painting ($826,473.50) and the actual cost of the O.J. Painting subcontract ($450,414). Further, the court found that when the DOT deleted the $826,473.50 from the contract the DOT understood that the actual estimate used by Paquet for the bridge painting work was $450,414, the amount specified in the O.J. Painting subcontract approved by the DOT. However, the trial court did not award Paquet the full $376,000, observing that the DOT "[was] entitled to have a reduction of [the $376,000 amount] by virtue of the profit that was anticipated in that aspect of the job." Conceding that it could not determine the reduced amount with "any mathematical certainty," the trial court awarded Paquet $325,000.Read the Trial Court Decision below and answer the following questions: 1. What was the reasoning behind the court's decision (not to delete the entire $826,473.50)? 2. How was the final amount awarded to Paquet determined