THE CITY OF TAMPA, APPELLANT,
v.
JANKE CONSTRUCTION, INC. AND THE OHIO CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The City of Tampa appeals a breach of contract judgment awarded to Janke Construction for $415,059.09. The appellate court affirms the underlying judgment on three issues but reverses and remands to correct the calculation of postjudgment interest, holding that prejudgment interest cannot itself bear interest.
Prejudgment interest cannot itself bear postjudgment interest. The final judgment must be amended to apportion the judgment into separate components of principal, costs, and prejudgment interest so that postjudgment interest accrues only on the principal and costs, not on the prejudgment interest component.
[1] Prejudgment interest awarded in a judgment cannot itself bear postjudgment interest.
[2] Postjudgment interest applies to the total of the principal, court costs, and attorneys' fees, but not to the prejudgment interest component of an award.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the award of prejudgment interest cannot itself bear interest”
States the controlling legal principle that prejudgment interest is exempt from postjudgment interest.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA jury awarded Janke Construction $301,295.81 on breach of contract claims. The trial court calculated prejudgment interest of $137,437.82 and costs o…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Accrual Of Interest cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The City of Tampa appeals a final judgment which awarded Janke Construction, Inc., $415,059.09 on Janke’s breach of contract claim. The City has raised four issues on appeal. We affirm on three issues without discussion but agree with the City that the final judgment must be amended in regards to the award of interest.
The jury awarded Janke $301,295.81 on its claims. The trial court calculated the prejudgment interest to be $137,437.82 and awarded costs of $4,196.35. These three items totaled $442,929.98. The jury awarded the City $20,083.96 on its counterclaim. The prejudgment interest on this amount was $7,786.93 for a total award of $27,870.89. The trial court set off Janke’s award by the amount of the City’s award and entered a judgment in favor of Janke for a total of $415,059.09. By operation of law, the judgment will bear interest at an annual rate of twelve percent. See § 55.03, Fla.Stat. (1991). The City claims that it is error for the prejudgment interest component of the final judgment to bear interest.
We agree and conclude that the award of prejudgment interest cannot itself bear interest. See Coggan v. Coggan, 183 So. 2d 839 (Fla. 2d DCA), cert. denied, 188 So. 2d 820 (Fla.1966). See also Higley South, Inc. v. Quality Engineered Installation, 1994 WL 3600 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). We recognize that the Fifth District has taken a contrary position in Peavy v. Dyer, 605 So. 2d 1330 (Fla. 5th DCA1992) and Indian River Colony Club, Inc. v. Schopke Construction & Engineering, Inc., 619 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 5th DCA1993). We certify conflict with those decisions.
We note that one of the grounds the Peavy court used to support its position was the fact that Form 1.988(b) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure provided for postjudgment interest to be calculated on the entire judgment, which included a prejudgment interest component. The supreme court, however, amended that form “to clarify that post-judgment interest only applies to the total of the principal, court costs, and attorneys’ fees.” In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Civil Procedures, 604 So. 2d 1110, 1111 (Fla.1992).
We, therefore, reverse the judgment in its present form and remand for entry of an amended final judgment which makes clear that postjudgment interest will not accrue on the prejudgment interest component of the award. It will be necessary for the trial court to apportion the judgment into components of principal, costs, and prejudgment interest after the setoff.
SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and PARKER and BLUE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, 604 So. 2d 1110 (Fla. 1992)
- Anderson v. Garber, 188 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 1966)
- Peavy v. Dyer, 605 So. 2d 1330 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)
- Gatto v. Baron Props., Inc., 183 So. 2d 839 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966)
- Coggan v. Coggan, 183 So. 2d 839 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)
- Indian River Colony Club, Inc. v. Schopke Constr. & Eng'g, Inc., 619 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)