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

• Taylor v. N.H. Ins. Co. of Manchester
  489 So. 2d 207· Fla. 2d DCA· 1986-05-30 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the trial court erred in denying appellants' request for prejudgment interest on the jury verdict.
• Hampton Foods, Inc. v. The AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co.
  787 F.2d 349· 8th Cir.· 1986-03-24 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the "all-risks" insurance policy covered Hampton's losses resulting from its evacuation of a building in danger of collapse, but reversed and remanded the issue of interest on corporate indebtedness.
• Biscayne Supermarket, Inc. v. The Travelers Ins. Co.
  485 So. 2d 861· Fla. 3d DCA· 1986-03-18 ·cited 9×
• Meigs & Cope Agency OF Fla., Inc. v. Edythe Koffey
  435 So. 2d 867· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-07-05 ·cited 9×
  The court held that prejudgment interest should be added to the judgment because the claim was contractual, the amount was liquidated by the jury verdict, and the defendant stipulated to entitlement to interest.
• Shreve Land Co., Inc. v. J & D Fin. Corp.
  421 So. 2d 722· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-11-09 ·cited 9×
  An assignee takes a contract subject to the assignor's burdens, including setoffs for breach of contract, even if the assignee seeks to enforce payment for a partial shipment.
• Stevens v. F/V Bonnie Doon
  655 F.2d 206· 9th Cir.· 1981-09-04 ·cited 9×
  The court held that while the apportionment of fault and appellant's damages were correctly determined, appellee's lost profits and prejudgment interest on unexpended repair costs were improperly awarded, requiring remand for further findings on appellee's vessel damage.
• Trio Process Corp. v. L. Goldstein's Sons, Inc.
  638 F.2d 661· 3d Cir.· 1981-01-20 ·cited 9×
  The court clarified that prejudgment interest should only be applied to primary damages, not enhanced damages, because the enhancement was punitive due to bad faith. It also held that interest should be compounded annually.
• Lothar Geyer v. Vargas Prods., Inc.
  627 F.2d 732· 5th Cir.· 1980-10-10 ·cited 9×
  The court held that personal jurisdiction over Vargas was proper under Florida's long-arm statute and that the remittitur was not an abuse of discretion, but the award of prejudgment interest was improper as it was not submitted to the jury.
• Bayview Constr. Corp. v. Jomar Props., LLC.
  97 So. 3d 909· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-08-29 ·cited 8×
  Bayview Construction sought certiorari review of a trial court order reducing a construction lien transfer bond from $1,602,455.40 to $1,297,991.70 based on an arbitration award. The Fourth District Court of Appeal found certiorari jurisdiction was proper because the reduction co
• Allstate Ins. v. Palterovich
  653 F. Supp. 2d 1306· S.D. Fla.· 2009-08-26 ·cited 8×
  The court granted plaintiffs' motion for default judgment, ordering final judgment against defendants for their RICO, fraud, and civil remedies act violations.
• N. Pointe Ins. Co. v. Tomas
  16 So. 3d 977· Fla. 3d DCA· 2009-08-26 ·cited 8×
  North Pointe Insurance Company appealed an order confirming an appraisal award and awarding prejudgment interest from the date of loss in a homeowners' insurance dispute. The court affirmed, holding that because North Pointe initially denied coverage before later agreeing to appr
• McFALL v. Trubey
  992 So. 2d 867· Fla. 2d DCA· 2008-10-03 ·cited 8×
  The McFalls owned real property as tenants in common with the W. Leslie Trubey Trust and paid all property expenses for both parties' shares from 1987 to 2004. The circuit court limited their reimbursement claims to a four-year period by applying a statute of limitations for cont
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. K.W. Brown & Co.
  555 F. Supp. 2d 1275· S.D. Fla.· 2008-01-04 ·cited 8×
  The court found the defendants liable for violations of federal securities laws, including anti-fraud and books and records provisions, due to a cherry-picking scheme and misleading disclosures.
• Republic Servs., Inc. v. Calabrese
  939 So. 2d 225· Fla. 5th DCA· 2006-10-13 ·cited 8×
  Republic Services appealed a trial court judgment in a contract dispute involving a stock purchase agreement and guarantees. The appellate court affirmed the judgment in all respects except reversed and remanded the calculation of pre-judgment interest, holding that the parties'
• Cincinnati Equitable INS. Co. v. Hawit
  933 So. 2d 1233· Fla. 3d DCA· 2006-07-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that prejudgment interest on attorney's fees accrues from the date entitlement is determined, not the jury verdict date, and attorney's fees are not recoverable for time spent litigating the amount of fees.
• Bellino v. W & W Lumber & Bldg. Supplies, Inc.
  902 So. 2d 829· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-03-30 ·cited 8×
  Cindy Bellino appealed a judgment in favor of W & W Lumber for unpaid construction materials, primarily disputing whether she authorized the substitution of 94-inch doors for 96-inch doors and whether installation problems were her responsibility. The court reversed the trial cou
• The Home Ins. Co. v. Crawford & Co.
  890 So. 2d 1186· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-01-05 ·cited 8×
  Home Insurance Company sued Crawford & Company, its claims adjuster, for breach of contract, fraud, and breach of fiduciary duty arising from Crawford's mishandling of a settlement opportunity that resulted in a substantial verdict against Home. The trial court directed verdict o
• El Jordan v. Solymar
  315 F. Supp. 2d 1355· S.D. Fla.· 2004-04-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Solymar, S. De R.L. was the responsible carrier and issuer of the bill of lading, and thus liable for the damaged cargo, as it failed to prove it was not the carrier or that it acted for a disclosed principal.
• Collins Moving & Storage Corp. OF S.C. v. Ira Michael Kirkell and Sandra Kirkell
  867 So. 2d 1179· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-03-03 ·cited 8×
  Collins Moving & Storage appeals a judgment awarding the Kirkells damages, pre- and post-judgment interest, and attorney's fees for damaged and missing household goods shipped under the Carmack Amendment. The court affirmed the interest award under Florida law but reversed the at
• Jarratt G. Bennett v. Morales
  845 So. 2d 1002· Fla. 5th DCA· 2003-05-23 ·cited 8×
  In this securities fraud case, the appellate court reviewed attorney fee and cost awards totaling over $619,000 granted to Susan Howell against Bennett and IFG Network Securities. The court affirmed the prejudgment interest award but reversed the use of a contingency risk multipl
• Cartier-McDONALD Constr., Inc. v. Waterview Dev., Inc.
  833 So. 2d 822· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-12-04 ·cited 8×
  In a mechanic's lien foreclosure dispute, the court affirmed the trial court's judgment awarding the lien to Waterview with a set-off for Cartier's defective work, but reversed and remanded the denial of pre-judgment interest for reconsideration on the merits.
• Maytronics, Ltd. v. Aqua VAC Sys., Inc.
  277 F.3d 1317· 11th Cir.· 2002-01-04 ·cited 8×
  Maytronics, an Israeli pool cleaner manufacturer, sued Aqua Vac for breach of contract after Aqua Vac terminated their distributorship agreement without adequate notice. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed judgment for Maytronics, holding that under Florida's UCC, a party terminated fr
• Allstate Indem. Co. v. Leandro DE LA Rosa
  800 So. 2d 245· Fla. 3d DCA· 2001-09-12 ·cited 8×
  Allstate Indemnity Company appealed a trial court's order granting class certification in a case where the class representative alleged Allstate violated Florida's PIP insurance statute by failing to pay 80% of medical bills without proper justification and failing to pay statuto
• GAY v. Beary
  758 So. 2d 1242· Fla. 5th DCA· 2000-05-26 ·cited 8×
  Carole Gay appealed the denial of attorney's fees in a civil forfeiture proceeding after the Sheriff voluntarily dismissed the case. The Sheriff cross-appealed an award of interest. The court affirmed both rulings, holding that attorney's fees are awardable even when a forfeiture
• Persinger v. Est. OF Phillip T. Tibbetts
  727 So. 2d 350· Fla. 5th DCA· 1999-02-19 ·cited 8×
  In a building contract dispute involving construction defects and cost calculations, the appellants challenge a trial court judgment requiring payment to the estate of the builder. The court affirms the trial judge's factual findings on damages and cost-plus contract calculations
• Nutrivida, Inc. v. Inmuno Vital, Inc.
  46 F. Supp. 2d 1310· S.D. Fla.· 1998-12-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Nutrivida's knowing and willful infringement of Inmuno Vital's intellectual property rights, including the unauthorized use of celebrity endorsements and trademarks, warranted disgorgement of profits, punitive damages, prejudgment interest, and attorneys' fees
• DeSALVO v. Scottsdale Ins. Co.
  705 So. 2d 694· Fla. 1st DCA· 1998-01-30 ·cited 8×
  A personal representative of an insured's estate appeals the trial court's denial of attorney's fees and costs in an insurance coverage dispute, arguing the insured was a prevailing party entitled to fees under Florida Statute § 627.428 despite not exceeding the insurer's final s
• SUN Power Diesel, Inc. v. Fla. Detroit Diesel-Allison, Inc.
  701 So. 2d 1230· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-12-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appellant was entitled to prejudgment interest on damages awarded for rejected goods, but affirmed the trial court's award of attorney's fees to the appellee.
• Siedlecki v. Arabia
  699 So. 2d 1040· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-10-08 ·cited 8×
  This case involves a dispute over a contract between Leonard Arabia and the Siedleckis, American National Corporation (ANC), and Biscayne Insurance Company (BIC), where Arabia sued for breach of contract and fraud. The appellate court reversed the breach of contract verdict again
• Eaton Vance Distribs., Inc. v. Ulrich
  692 So. 2d 915· Fla. 2d DCA· 1997-03-19 ·cited 8×
  Statements made in a Form U-5 are subject to a qualified privilege, not absolute privilege, and prejudgment interest is not available on punitive damages and costs.
• Tolin v. Vasil M. Doudov
  626 So. 2d 1054· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-11-10 ·cited 8×
  This appeal addresses a land sale dispute where the seller failed to timely provide a promised access road to the purchaser's five-acre property. The court upheld the jury's damages award based on loss of use but reversed the trial court's improper amortized calculation of prejud
• Eaton Constr. Co. v. Edwards
  617 So. 2d 858· Fla. 5th DCA· 1993-05-07 ·cited 8×
  Eaton Construction Company appeals the denial of its motion for new trial in a wrongful death case involving a vehicle theft and high-speed chase. The court reverses because the trial court erroneously instructed the jury that violation of section 316.1975 (unattended motor vehic
• State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Albert
  618 So. 2d 278· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-04-13 ·cited 8×
• Herzog Contracting Corp. v. McGOWEN Corp.
  976 F.2d 1062· 7th Cir.· 1992-10-01 ·cited 8×
  A Rule 59(e) motion, even if labeled nunc pro tunc, tolls the time for appeal if it is substantive, and parol evidence is admissible to show a promissory note was a sham not intended to be enforceable.
• McKNIGHT v. Gen. Motors Corp.
  973 F.2d 1366· 7th Cir.· 1992-09-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying reinstatement or front pay, nor in refusing to reopen the record, and that the request for prejudgment interest was untimely.
• State v. Brouwer's Flowers, Inc.
  600 So. 2d 1260· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-06-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that pre-judgment interest on an award of attorney's fees in an eminent domain action is improper before the trial court determines the fee amount.
• Schake v. Colt Indus. Operating Corp. Severance Plan FOR Salaried Emps.
  960 F.2d 1187· 3d Cir.· 1992-04-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that it lacked appellate jurisdiction over the unliquidated award of attorney fees, but had jurisdiction over the final decision regarding prejudgment interest.
• Wilfredo Colon Velez v. Puerto RICO Marine Mgmt., Inc.
  957 F.2d 933· 1st Cir.· 1992-02-28 ·cited 8×
  Section 9(b)(3) of the LMRA limits the NLRB's certification powers, not an employer's ability to voluntarily enter into or maintain a collective bargaining agreement with a union representing both guards and non-guards, nor the union's duty of fair representation to its guard mem
• Fla. Cmty. Health Ctr. & Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass'n v. Ross
  590 So. 2d 1037· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-12-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) properly determined the claimant's average weekly wage and awarded benefits, prejudgment interest and penalties cannot be awarded against the Florida Insurance Guaranty Association (FIGA).
• Action S.A. v. Marc Rich & Co., Inc.
  951 F.2d 504· 2d Cir.· 1991-12-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant's actions did not demonstrate intent to relinquish U.S. citizenship, thus establishing diversity jurisdiction, and that the default judgment was not to be set aside due to willfulness and prejudice. However, the court remanded for recalculation o
• H.H. Robertson Co. v. V.S. DiCARLO Gen. Contractors, Inc.
  950 F.2d 572· 8th Cir.· 1991-12-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the quantum meruit claim should not have been submitted to the jury without limiting it to work outside the contract scope, and that the jury instructions were otherwise adequate. The prejudgment interest award on the contract retention amount was proper.
• Eastman Kodak Co. v. Westway Motor Freight, Inc.
  949 F.2d 317· 10th Cir.· 1991-11-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the market value rule was the proper measure of damages for destroyed film under the Interstate Commerce Act, and that the carrier failed to prove special reasons or mitigation failures to justify deviation from this rule.
• Borges v. OUR Lady OF THE SEA Corp.
  935 F.2d 436· 1st Cir.· 1991-06-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to disqualify counsel, striking the testimony of a witness due to the absence of an interpreter, or in its application of prejudgment interest on past damages. However, prejudgment interest
• Lopez v. Corporacion Insular de Seguros
  931 F.2d 116· 1st Cir.· 1991-04-19 ·cited 8×
  A private insurer of a state entity cannot assert the state's Eleventh Amendment immunity when sued under a direct action statute that grants a substantive claim against the insurer.
• Deniece Scales v. J.C. Bradford & Co.
  925 F.2d 901· 6th Cir.· 1991-02-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in limiting discovery and in failing to find a prima facie case of disparate impact discrimination, but did not err in denying prejudgment interest or in its initial determination of attorney hourly rates.
• J.D. Hamilton v. 1ST Source Bank
  928 F.2d 86· 4th Cir.· 1990-12-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the 180-day statute of limitations for pay discrimination claims under ADEA should be subject to a discovery rule, not applied mechanically.
• Mel Cyrak for Steve King v. Stan Lemon
  919 F.2d 320· 5th Cir.· 1990-12-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Kramer and Lemon's appeals were untimely filed, and affirmed Weber's liability but reversed the damages award, finding that the district court erred in awarding both actual damages for the Rule 10b-5 violation and punitive damages.
• Jones v. Sterile Prods. Corp.
  572 So. 2d 519· Fla. 5th DCA· 1990-11-08 ·cited 8×
  Edward Jones and Sterile Assembly Systems appealed from a summary judgment and permanent injunction awarding damages to Sterile Products Corporation for alleged breach of a noncompete covenant. The court reversed, finding that the summary judgment was improperly entered because m
• Powers v. Grinnell Corp.
  915 F.2d 34· 1st Cir.· 1990-09-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the scope of a civil complaint under the ADEA is limited by the administrative charge filed, and that an award of liquidated damages under the ADEA precludes prejudgment interest.
• United States Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Gurnee INN Corp.
  914 F.2d 815· 7th Cir.· 1990-09-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting injunctive relief, awarding back pay, and awarding compounded prejudgment interest.