With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". even in the Hugheses and Calhoun’s trial brief, they argued that the Hugheses had sustained $9,262.50 in damage but did not argue that Calhoun had sustained any damage. Because we conclude that the damages awards were not supported by evidence in the record, we must reverse the trial court’s judgment on this issue. See, e.g., Blair v. Cooper, 392 So.2d 1205, 1207 (Ala.Civ.App.1981). V. Additionally, the Darnalls argue that the trial court erred in admitting a “Google Earth” aerial photograph and an Alabama Atlas and Gazetteer as exhibits. We need not determine whether these exhibits were admissible, because, even if their admission was error, the Darnalls have not shown how the error was injurious to their ease. See New Plan Realty Trust v. Morgan, 792 So.2d 351, 363 (Ala.2000) (<HOLDING>). They argue that the Google Earth map showed

A: holding that any error in the exclusion of evidence is cured by the subsequent admission of the evidence
B: holding that defendants bear the burden of showing that the challenged act was objectively reasonable citation omitted
C: recognizing under plain error review that the burden to show that substantial rights have been prejudiced is on the party that failed to raise the issue below and for an error to have affected substantial rights the error must have affected the outcome of the district court proceedings
D: holding that the appellants bear the burden of showing that an error in the admission of evidence has   probably injuriously affected substantial rights of the appellants   quoting atkins v lee 603 so2d 937 946 ala1992 quoting in turn rule 45 ala rapp p
D.