Prejudgment Interest

2,315 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 3 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Smith v. Shell OIL Co.
  746 F.2d 1087· 5th Cir.· 1984-11-27 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the jury's findings of negligence against Shell and PSI were supported by sufficient evidence, and that the indemnity agreement between Shell and PSI was valid and enforceable. However, the court reversed the denial of prejudgment interest.
• Mrs. Evelyn H. Domangue v. E. AIR Lines, Inc.
  722 F.2d 256· 5th Cir.· 1984-01-13 ·cited 18×
  The court held that post-judgment and prejudgment interest may be awarded in addition to the $75,000 liability limitation imposed by the Warsaw Convention and Montreal Agreement.
• Cap. Marine Supply, Inc. v. M/V Roland Thomas, II
  719 F.2d 104· 5th Cir.· 1983-11-07 ·cited 18×
  The court held that testimony based on computerized business records, properly authenticated, is admissible under the business records exception to the hearsay rule, but vacated the interest award due to a calculation error.
• Curry v. Fluor Drilling Servs., Inc.
  715 F.2d 893· 5th Cir.· 1983-09-26 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the presumption of an equitable maintenance rate was rebutted by evidence that the plaintiff lived at home, thus disallowing maintenance beyond the amount actually paid.
• Charles L. Feather t/a Feather Trucking v. Patterson
  711 F.2d 530· 3d Cir.· 1983-06-30 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the district court's finding of liability under the NLRA and its exemption from antitrust liability, but remanded for further findings on causation for damages and agency for one plaintiff.
• Musial v. A & A Boats, Inc.
  696 F.2d 1149· 5th Cir.· 1983-02-04 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding that the vessel owner and charterer were negligent, the plaintiff was not contributorily negligent, and the plaintiff was totally and permanently disabled.
• Am. Enka Co. v. Wicaco Mach. Corp.
  686 F.2d 1050· 3d Cir.· 1982-08-16 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the value of lost bailed goods should be assessed at the time of demand, not the time of bailment, and that the case should be remanded for reconsideration of pre-judgment interest.
• RED Lobster Inns OF Am., Inc. v. Lawyers Title Ins. Corp. & Standard Abstract & Title Co., Inc.
  656 F.2d 381· 8th Cir.· 1981-08-25 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the national agreement was a separate contract not merged into the title policy, and that misperformance supported a tort claim for lost profits, but prejudgment interest was not recoverable as the damages were not precisely calculable at the time of loss.
• Cargill v. Taylor Towing Serv., Inc.
  642 F.2d 239· 8th Cir.· 1981-03-03 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying lost profits due to speculative evidence, but did err in denying prejudgment interest without finding exceptional circumstances.
• Hembree v. Ga. Power Co.
  637 F.2d 423· 5th Cir.· 1981-02-20 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Company violated the Veterans' Reemployment Rights Act by failing to reemploy the plaintiff in a position of like seniority, status, and pay, and that denial of prejudgment interest was an abuse of discretion.
• Int'l Paint Co., Inc. v. M/V Mission Viking
  637 F.2d 382· 5th Cir.· 1981-02-19 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the mortgage instrument did not waive the mortgagee's statutory priority and that a catering firm was subrogated to crew wages liens, entitling it to prejudgment interest.
• Bauer v. Uniroyal Tire Co.
  630 F.2d 1287· 8th Cir.· 1980-09-26 ·cited 18×
  The court held that Uniroyal unreasonably delayed filing its interpleader action, thus prejudgment interest was properly awarded from the date of repossession, and that Roland Bauer failed to prove ownership of the tires, thus his conversion claim failed.
• S. Cent. Livestock Dealers, Inc. v. Sec. State Bank OF Hedley
  614 F.2d 1056· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-04 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Bank wrongfully offset funds in the Feedlot's cattle account because it knew the funds belonged to third parties, and affirmed the jury's award of actual damages and exemplary damages, modifying only the prejudgment interest calculation.
• Alarm Sys. OF Fla., Inc. v. Singer
  380 So. 2d 1162· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-03-11 ·cited 18×
  In this insurance coverage dispute arising from a burglary, the court affirmed the trial judgment finding Alarm Systems liable for the loss of scheduled property but reversed the award of pre-judgment interest to the Singers (insureds) while affirming such interest for St. Paul F
• Sec. Tire & Rubber Co. v. The Gates Rubber Co.
  598 F.2d 962· 5th Cir.· 1979-07-12 ·cited 18×
  Transfers from a parent corporation to its wholly-owned subsidiary cannot be considered separate sales to a favored customer for Robinson-Patman Act price discrimination claims, as they are internal transfers within a single economic unit.
• Belcher v. Birmingham Tr. Nat'l Bank
  488 F.2d 474· 5th Cir.· 1973-12-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court's fee award was not sufficiently supported by evidence, requiring vacation and remand, but reversed the award of prejudgment interest.
• Gulf OIL Corp. v. Panama Canal Co.
  481 F.2d 561· 5th Cir.· 1973-06-29 ·cited 18×
  The court held that pre-judgment interest should be allowed in this maritime allision claim, and that certain expenses incurred by the vessel owner were necessarily incurred by reason of the accident.
• Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh v. D & L Constr. Co.
  353 F.2d 169· 8th Cir.· 1965-11-18 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a surety is not entitled to reformation of unambiguous bonds based on a unilateral mistake of law, and that completion costs recoverable by a prime contractor must be offset by the unpaid subcontract balance.
• Noel v. United Aircraft Corp.
  342 F.2d 232· 3d Cir.· 1964-12-09 ·cited 18×
  The court denies rehearing, finding the manufacturer negligent for failing to warn of propeller malfunctions, without affirming a new concept of continuing duty to improve.
• D & L Constr. Co. v. Triangle Elec. Supply Co., Inc.
  332 F.2d 1009· 8th Cir.· 1964-06-22 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a prime contractor's surety is liable for interest and attorneys' fees on a Capehart Act bond when the subcontractor expressly agreed to these terms in its contract with the material supplier.
• Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co. v. ELK Ref. Co.
  186 F.2d 30· 4th Cir.· 1950-12-13 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court erred in not awarding damages for loss of use and prejudgment interest, but affirmed the finding of liability.
• Totale, Inc. v. Smith
  877 So. 2d 813· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-07-07 ·cited 17×
  Smith invested $100,000 in Totale, Inc. and sued for fraud. A jury awarded $350,000 in damages, but the appellate court reversed the damage award, holding that only $100,000 plus pre-judgment interest was supportable under Florida's damages framework for fraud cases.
• Lexington Ins. Co. v. Ramdas and Chitra Bhandari
  807 So. 2d 727· Fla. 3d DCA· 2002-02-06 ·cited 17×
  Lexington Insurance Company's appeal of a judgment for insureds Ramdas and Chitra Bhandari is affirmed in part (no material misrepresentations found) and reversed in part (prejudgment interest award reversed, with interest to run from appraisal award date instead).
• Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Joe's Stone Crab, Inc.
  15 F. Supp. 2d 1364· S.D. Fla.· 1998-08-12 ·cited 17×
  The court held that applicants deterred from applying due to the employer's reputation for discrimination are entitled to back pay calculated from the date they were deterred, not just from the date of application.
• Vining v. Martyn
  660 So. 2d 1081· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-08-16 ·cited 17×
  In this attorney-client dispute, the Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment against attorney Edward Vining for conversion, civil theft, and fraud on the court in connection with his representation of Eva Martyn in a 1980 dissolution proceeding. The co
• Bush Leasing, Inc. v. Gallo
  634 So. 2d 737· Fla. 1st DCA· 1994-03-24 ·cited 17×
  Three consolidated appeals involving a vehicle leasing dispute arising from a 1989 automobile collision. The court affirmed that Bush Leasing was liable under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine despite a long-term lease agreement, rejected Bush's insurance compliance defense
• AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co. v. The Protective Nat'l Ins. Co. of Omaha
  631 So. 2d 305· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-10-26 ·cited 17×
  Aetna Casualty & Surety Company appeals a summary judgment holding it vicariously liable for an attorney's negligent failure to raise a statute of limitations defense, resulting in an $1.8 million judgment against the insured. The Florida Court of Appeals held that insurance comp
• In re Brooklyn Navy Yard Asbestos Litig. (Joint E. & S. Dist. Asbestos Litigation)
  971 F.2d 831· 2d Cir.· 1992-06-30 ·cited 17×
  The court held that plaintiffs' proof of causation was sufficient, the jury instructions on superseding cause were adequate, and the district court properly applied the government contractor defense to bar design defect claims. The court also affirmed the exclusion of certain evi
• McADAM v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc.
  896 F.2d 750· 3d Cir.· 1990-02-13 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the jury's award on the UCC counts was duplicative and unsustainable because it exceeded the plaintiff's net loss after accounting for refunds.
• Stevens Tech. Servs., Inc. v. SS Brooklyn
  885 F.2d 584· 9th Cir.· 1989-09-12 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the magistrate did not err in enforcing the maritime lien and entering judgment against the owner in personam, but erred in denying prejudgment interest.
• Agfa-Gevaert v. A.B. Dick Co.
  879 F.2d 1518· 7th Cir.· 1989-07-18 ·cited 17×
  The court agrees with the judgment but notes the contract is ambiguous, requiring further proceedings.
• Carey v. Bahama Cruise Lines
  864 F.2d 201· 1st Cir.· 1988-12-20 ·cited 17×
  The court held that maritime law, not Massachusetts comparative negligence law, governs the calculation of damages for a maritime tort, and that the district court erred in applying the Massachusetts rule which barred recovery when the plaintiff was more than 50% negligent.
• Conn. Gen. Life Ins. Co. v. Universal Ins. Co.
  838 F.2d 612· 1st Cir.· 1988-02-09 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the insurance policy's mortgage clause applied only to buildings, not personal property, and that the claimant failed to adequately trace commingled trust funds into the bankrupt estate. The court also affirmed the dismissal of a restitution claim based on an
• The Trs. OF the Univ. OF Pa. v. Lexington Ins. Co.
  815 F.2d 890· 3d Cir.· 1987-03-31 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the jury's finding of timely notice was supported by substantial evidence, rendering the issue of prejudice moot, and that Pennsylvania law would approve a two-tiered settlement if reasonable and made in good faith.
• Bosnor v. TUG L.A. Barrios
  796 F.2d 776· 5th Cir.· 1986-08-13 ·cited 17×
  The court held that a bareboat charterer has a proprietary interest sufficient to recover economic losses, and that the Ryan doctrine's application in maritime property damage cases is superseded by comparative fault principles.
• Parker Towing Co. & Gen. Transp., Inc. v. Yazoo River Towing, Inc.
  794 F.2d 591· 11th Cir.· 1986-07-21 ·cited 17×
  The court affirmed the district court's findings on negligence, fault apportionment, and prejudgment interest, but remanded for reconsideration of the loss of use damages claim.
• Warren v. OLD Dominion Ins. Co.
  465 So. 2d 1376· Fla. 5th DCA· 1985-03-28 ·cited 17×
  The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal held that insureds are entitled to prejudgment interest on an insurance claim from the date payment was due under the policy, even though the amount of loss was disputed at trial and only determined by jury verdict. The court reversed th
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Randolph
  736 F.2d 525· 9th Cir.· 1984-06-29 ·cited 17×
  The court held that a district court erred in rejecting a proposed consent decree for insider trading violations, finding that a case or controversy existed and that the decree was in the public interest despite the absence of prejudgment interest.
• Teamsters Pension Tr. Fund OF Philadelphia & Vicinity & Teamsters Health & Welf. Tr. Fund of Philadelphia & Vicinity & Schaffer, Jr. v. John Tinney Delivery Serv., Inc.
  732 F.2d 319· 3d Cir.· 1984-04-12 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980 should apply retroactively and that post-1979 claims were not precluded by prior summary judgment rulings.
• Honeywell, Inc. v. Trend Coin Co.
  449 So. 2d 876· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-04-03 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the trial court erred in excluding expert testimony regarding the value of stolen merchandise and in awarding prejudgment interest on an unliquidated claim.
• King Fisher Marine Serv., Inc. v. The NP Sunbonnet
  724 F.2d 1181· 5th Cir.· 1984-02-13 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court did not err in finding the towing company liable for the loss of the barge, awarding damages based on its unique value as a drydock platform, and awarding prejudgment interest from the date of loss.
• Commercial Standard Ins. Co. v. Bryce St. Apts., Ltd.
  703 F.2d 904· 5th Cir.· 1983-04-25 ·cited 17×
  The court held that HUD succeeded to the mortgagee's duties under the building loan agreement, and the surety succeeded to the subcontractors' rights, allowing recovery of retainage.
• Brooks v. The Sch. Bd. OF Brevard Cnty.
  419 So. 2d 659· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-08-04 ·cited 17×
  A public school employee wrongfully dismissed due to a subsequently invalidated teaching certificate revocation is entitled to back pay for the entire period of dismissal due to a violation of due process rights.
• Firth v. United States
  554 F.2d 990· 9th Cir.· 1977-05-31 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court erred in awarding 7% interest and awarding interest from the original judgment date, and that the $150,000 wage-loss award lacked sufficient justification.
• Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. Ariety Amat and Briceida Leon
  198 So. 3d 730· Fla. 2d DCA· 2016-02-19 ·cited 16×
  Citizens Property Insurance Corporation appeals a jury verdict awarding homeowners damages for sinkhole-related property damage. The court affirms the coverage determination but reverses portions of the judgment regarding payment for subsurface repairs and prejudgment interest, h
• Craigside, LLC v. GDC View, LLC
  74 So. 3d 1087· Fla. 1st DCA· 2011-07-22 ·cited 16×
  Craigside LLC sued GDC View LLC for breach of a preconstruction condominium purchase agreement, seeking return of $1.125 million paid and interest. The trial court ruled for GDC, finding no breach. The appellate court reversed in part, holding that while Craigside's anticipatory
• Mathers v. Brown
  21 So. 3d 834· Fla. 4th DCA· 2009-09-09 ·cited 16×
  William Mathers appealed a dissolution of marriage judgment, challenging the trial court's determination that the entire appreciation in his stock portfolio was marital property rather than apportioning it between passive and active appreciation. The Fourth District affirmed, hol
• Browning v. Angelfish Swim Sch., Inc.
  1 So. 3d 355· Fla. 3d DCA· 2009-01-28 ·cited 16×
  The Florida Secretary of State appealed a circuit court's class certification order in a lawsuit by two corporations challenging late annual report and reinstatement fees as violating the state constitutional prohibition on excessive punishments. The court affirmed class certific
• Checkers Drive-In Rests., Inc. v. Tampa Checkmate Food Servs., Inc.
  805 So. 2d 941· Fla. 2d DCA· 2001-11-14 ·cited 16×
  Checkers Drive-In Restaurants and two of its officers appealed judgments finding them liable for fraudulent inducement and violations of the Florida Franchise Act in connection with a Tampa franchise transaction. The court affirmed the finding that Robert Gagne was fraudulently i
• Allstate Ins. Co. v. Roberto and Maria Blanco
  791 So. 2d 515· Fla. 3d DCA· 2001-07-18 ·cited 16×
  Allstate Insurance Company appealed an award of prejudgment interest to homeowners Roberto and Maria Blanco for hurricane damage losses. The Third District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that prejudgment interest should be computed from the date of the appraisal award, not the