Prejudgment Interest

2,312 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh v. Lanny Gelfand and Sondra Gelfand
  477 So. 2d 28· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-10-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Gelfands were entitled to pre-judgment interest on their award.
• City OF Boston v. S.S. Texaco Tex.
  773 F.2d 1396· 1st Cir.· 1985-09-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the pilotage clause in a towage agreement is valid and enforceable, and that the award of prejudgment interest from the date of the collision was proper.
• Arceneaux v. Merrill Lynch
  767 F.2d 1498· 11th Cir.· 1985-08-12 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the jury's verdict and the district court's rulings, finding substantial evidence supported the churning claim, punitive damages were not excessive, and the awards for attorney's fees and prejudgment interest were proper.
• Austin v. B.J. Loftsgaarden
  768 F.2d 949· 8th Cir.· 1985-07-16 ·cited 6×
• Dynamics Corp. OF Am. v. The United States
  766 F.2d 518· Fed. Cir.· 1985-06-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that compound interest may be appropriate for calculating delay damages under 28 U.S.C. § 1498, and remanded for reconsideration of this issue.
• Bank OF Cent. Fla. v. Dep't OF Banking & Fin.
  470 So. 2d 742· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-05-24 ·cited 6×
  Bank of Central Florida appeals a Department of Banking and Finance order determining the value of dissenting shareholders' stock in a bank merger at $46.59 per share. The court affirms the Department's valuation and rejects the shareholders' claims for prejudgment interest, post
• Consol. Cigar Co. v. Tex. Commerce Bank (Formerly Pan Am. Bank)
  749 F.2d 1169· 5th Cir.· 1985-01-10 ·cited 6×
  The court should reverse and remand for a new trial due to contradictory jury instructions.
• Zipper v. Affordable Homes, Inc.
  461 So. 2d 988· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-12-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while the contract was breached, the damages awarded were improperly calculated and must be reconsidered.
• Magnus Domangue, Jr. v. Penrod Drilling Co.
  748 F.2d 999· 5th Cir.· 1984-12-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that prejudgment interest is not available when a jury awards damages for both Jones Act negligence and general maritime law unseaworthiness claims arising from the same accident, as the damages cannot be properly apportioned.
• Riseman v. Orion Research, Inc.
  749 F.2d 915· 1st Cir.· 1984-11-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's payment for stock options, despite conditions precedent and his loss of director status, constituted a 'purchase' under Section 16(b) because he incurred irrevocable liability and the transaction offered potential for speculative abuse.
• Dep't OF Transp. v. Hawkins Bridge Co.
  457 So. 2d 525· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-09-19 ·cited 6×
  The Florida Department of Transportation appeals a jury verdict finding it liable for breach of contract and awarding damages totaling $2,779,000 plus prejudgment interest to Fairchild-Florida for costs incurred due to pier failure delays during bridge construction. The appellate
• Contrail Leasing P'rs, Ltd. v. Consol. Airways, Inc.
  742 F.2d 1095· 7th Cir.· 1984-08-31 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in calculating damages by failing to include accrued interest and propeller repair costs as deductible expenses for the secured creditor, and that the valuation of the collateral was not adequately supported. The case is remanded for r
• The City OF Miami v. Bailey & Dawes
  453 So. 2d 187· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-07-24 ·cited 6×
  The City of Miami's appeal of a $175,000 jury verdict for reasonable attorney fees owed to Bailey & Dawes was affirmed, with the court finding no harmful error and upholding the trial court's assessment of prejudgment interest.
• Kisco Co., Inc. v. Verson Allsteel Press Co.
  738 F.2d 290· 8th Cir.· 1984-06-29 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment on contract and quasi-contract issues but remanded for further consideration of prejudgment interest.
• VAN Gemert v. The Boeing Co.
  739 F.2d 730· 2d Cir.· 1984-06-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that 28 U.S.C. §§ 2041 and 2042 do not limit a district court's discretion in fashioning an equitable plan for distributing unclaimed class action judgment funds. The court also affirmed the denial of New York's motion to intervene.
• The Home Ins. Co. v. Certain Underwriters AT Lloyd's London
  729 F.2d 1132· 7th Cir.· 1984-03-19 ·cited 6×
  When multiple insurers' policies contain excess clauses covering the same risk, they must share the settlement costs on a pro rata basis, and an insurer may be estopped from asserting non-coverage if its prior conduct misled the other insurer.
• United States v. McLEOD
  721 F.2d 282· 9th Cir.· 1983-12-02 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in refusing to award double damages under the False Claims Act and in awarding prejudgment interest, but correctly applied the statute of limitations and denied the motion to implead.
• David Gorman in Bankr. for Int'l Glass & Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Largo Hosp. Owners, Ltd.
  435 So. 2d 872· Fla. 2d DCA· 1983-07-06 ·cited 6×
  The trustee in bankruptcy for International Glass appealed two orders on remand from a prior appeal. The court affirmed the award of attorney fees to Chanen Construction but reversed the denial of prejudgment interest on a modified money judgment, holding that interest on a modif
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. CARRÉ
  436 So. 2d 227· Fla. 2d DCA· 1983-07-01 ·cited 6×
  The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation appealed a jury verdict finding Metropolitan Bank negligent in allowing unauthorized access to Carré's safe deposit box. The court reversed, holding that the bank's partial exculpatory clause limiting liability to gross negligence, fraud,
• The Navajo Tribe v. The Bank OF NEW Mexico
  700 F.2d 1285· 10th Cir.· 1983-02-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Navajo Housing and Development Enterprise (NHDE) was a legally separate entity from the Navajo Tribe, and thus the bank could not set off the NHDE's debt against the Tribe's funds. The court also found that prejudgment interest should be awarded at 6% per
• Stinson v. Feminist Women's Health Ctr., Inc.
  416 So. 2d 1183· Fla. 1st DCA· 1982-06-28 ·cited 6×
  This case involves attorneys who appealed a judgment awarding damages against them for their conduct in handling a client's settlement funds. The appellate court affirmed the award of compensatory and punitive damages but reversed the award of attorneys' fees to the client.
• Chatlos Sys., Inc. v. Nat'l Cash Register Corp. Appeal of NCR Corp.
  670 F.2d 1304· 3d Cir.· 1982-01-15 ·cited 6×
  The district court erred in its calculation of damages for breach of warranty by relying on speculative expert testimony regarding the fair market value of a hypothetical computer system rather than the value of the goods as warranted. The contract price should serve as prima fac
• Blair Int'l, Ltd. v. LaBARGE, Inc.
  675 F.2d 954· 8th Cir.· 1982-01-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Ewbank breached its contract to purchase oil well casing, affirming the award of lost profits, but reversed the award of the escrow deposit due to LaBarge's failure to meet the escrow's mill commitment terms.
• Gabina Camacho Lopez v. Rodriguez
  668 F.2d 1376· D.C. Cir.· 1981-11-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that an employer is entitled to a credit for the reasonable cost of board and lodging furnished to a live-in domestic employee if the employee voluntarily accepted the job, even if the employee later found conditions onerous, unless those conditions became so coerc
• N. Natural GAS Co. v. Grounds
  666 F.2d 1279· 10th Cir.· 1981-11-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in rejecting the "work back" method of valuation for helium and that $2.00 per m.c.f. is the minimum entitlement for lessee-producers and landowners.
• Ramsey v. Mut. OF Omaha
  652 F.2d 764· 8th Cir.· 1981-07-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the jury instructions regarding the definition of 'accident' were not prejudicial and that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict finding coverage under the policies.
• Martin Marietta Corp. v. NEW Jersey Nat'l Bank
  653 F.2d 779· 3d Cir.· 1981-06-30 ·cited 6×
  The Third Circuit affirmed in part and remanded in part the district court's judgment. The court held that the sale of sand was not a bulk transfer and that the seller's retention of possession was not fraudulent. However, the court remanded the case to determine whether the buye
• Leslie Salt Co. v. ST. Paul Mercury Ins. Co.
  637 F.2d 657· 9th Cir.· 1981-03-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the insurer's delay in reconsidering a claim denial, while potentially in bad faith, did not justify awarding damages for inflation over several years. The court also found that attorney fees awarded in excess of policy coverage were improper.
• United States for the Use of Confederate Constr. Co. v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co. of Baltimore
  644 F.2d 747· 8th Cir.· 1981-03-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the surety was liable for earthwork performed by the subcontractor and that the award of prejudgment interest was not an abuse of discretion.
• Bunge Corp. v. Am. Commercial Barge Line Co. & Am. Commercial Lines, Inc.
  630 F.2d 1236· 7th Cir.· 1980-09-22 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion in denying prejudgment interest and remanded for its determination, but affirmed the damage calculations for the conveyor structure and dolphin.
• Martindale Lumber Co. v. Bituminous Cas. Corp.
  625 F.2d 618· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the accident and injuries fell within the policy's coverage and did not arise from an excluded hazard, and that the insurer breached its duty to defend.
• McKEE-Berger-Mansueto, Inc. v. Bd. OF Educ. OF the City OF Chicago
  626 F.2d 559· 7th Cir.· 1980-07-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court properly admitted evidence and denied amendments, that the contract remained in force through extensions, and that MBM's billing practices were permissible, but improperly awarded prejudgment interest.
• Huntington Beach Union High Sch. Dist. v. Cont'l Info. Sys. Corp.
  621 F.2d 353· 9th Cir.· 1980-06-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the School District's actions in delaying acceptance of a second-best offer were reasonable, entitling them to the full difference between the contract price and their actual cover price. The court also affirmed the award of consequential damages.
• Jesko v. American-First Title & Tr. Co.
  603 F.2d 815· 10th Cir.· 1979-08-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a title insurance company breached its duty to defend when it refused to defend the insured against claims challenging the validity of a trust, even if some claims were weak, and that prejudgment interest was improperly awarded on unliquidated damages.
• United States v. Metro Constr. Co., Inc.
  602 F.2d 879· 9th Cir.· 1979-08-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the 25% limitation under IRC § 3505(b) applies to prejudgment interest, not just the principal amount of taxes.
• Coast Trading Co. v. Cudahy Co.
  592 F.2d 1074· 9th Cir.· 1979-03-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the agent exceeded his authority for speculative contracts, but apparent authority existed for some contracts. The court further held that the seller's resale damages were invalid due to commercial unreasonableness, but allowed market value damages up to actua
• Hassie Duran Howell v. Marmpegaso Compania Naviera
  578 F.2d 86· 5th Cir.· 1978-08-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the intervenor's award must be deducted from the plaintiff's award before calculating interest on the plaintiff's award, and that the intervenor is also entitled to prejudgment interest from the date of judicial demand.
• Richard Nasrallah Homes, Inc. v. Rassler
  355 So. 2d 486· Fla. 2d DCA· 1978-02-24 ·cited 6×
• Siletz Trucking Co. v. Alaska Int'l Trading Co.
  467 F.2d 961· 9th Cir.· 1972-10-16 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the judgment against Alaska and Bullock for liquidated damages and denied Siletz's cross-appeal for prejudgment interest.
• Darrow L. Stemple v. Phillips Petroleum Co.
  430 F.2d 178· 10th Cir.· 1970-07-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court's jury instructions regarding lessor liability and the admissibility of evidence were permissible, and that Colorado conflict of laws rules would not apply its prejudgment interest statute to a non-resident plaintiff injured in another state.
• Burran v. Dambold
  422 F.2d 133· 10th Cir.· 1970-02-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the state building code, adopted under the Contractors' License Law, applies to design engineers and that the trial court did not err in instructing the jury on negligence per se. The court also affirmed the denial of prejudgment interest.
• VAN Nievelt v. Cargo & Tankship Mgmt. Corp.
  421 F.2d 1183· 2d Cir.· 1970-02-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that pre-judgment interest should have been awarded on liquidated damages arising from a breach of contract, as there were no exceptional circumstances to justify its denial.
• Marlene Caldecott as Administratrix of the Goods v. Long Island Lighting Co.
  417 F.2d 994· 2d Cir.· 1969-10-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the wrongful death judgment was supported by evidence, but the conscious pain and suffering award was excessive and required a remittitur or new trial. The cross-appeal regarding the interest rate was denied.
• Lynch v. Electro Refractories & Abrasives Corp.
  408 F.2d 363· 6th Cir.· 1969-03-27 ·cited 6×
  Plaintiff is entitled to collect interest on his tort judgment from the date of the filing of the complaint, not just from the date of judgment.
• Carter Elec. Co. & Gen. Ins. Co. of Am. v. The Travelers Indem. Co. & Beacon Constr. Co. of Mass., Inc.
  382 F.2d 567· 10th Cir.· 1967-08-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in striking the claim for punitive damages, denying pre-judgment interest, or in its findings regarding performance delays and set-offs, and that any error in denying further discovery was not prejudicial.
• United States v. E. AIR Lines, Inc.
  366 F.2d 316· 2d Cir.· 1966-09-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the insurers' motion for summary judgment should have been granted as the government's claim against them was time-barred by the policy's limitation clause, but the claim against Eastern was not time-barred and prejudgment interest was properly awarded.
• E. Serv. Mgmt. Co. v. United States
  363 F.2d 729· 4th Cir.· 1966-06-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the government's misrepresentation of building square footage constituted a breach of contract, but the district court erred in its calculation of damages and the award of pre-judgment interest.
• Seaboard Sur. Co. v. United States for Use & Benefit of C.D.G., Inc.
  355 F.2d 139· 9th Cir.· 1966-01-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a subcontractor wrongfully terminated can elect to sue for the reasonable value of work performed, and that pre-judgment interest is only proper on damages that are certain or capable of being made certain by calculation.
• Circle Line Sightseeing Yachts, Inc. v. Storbeck
  325 F.2d 338· 2d Cir.· 1963-12-03 ·cited 6×
  A federal court must enforce a state's wrongful death statute as an integrated whole, including its provisions for prejudgment interest, and cannot reduce the statutory interest rate against a private party based on limitations applicable only to municipalities.
• Aaron B. Weiner: LaSalle Nat'l Bank v. 222 E. Chestnut St. Corp.
  303 F.2d 630· 7th Cir.· 1962-05-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that increased financing costs and construction costs due to a supersedeas delay are recoverable damages under the bond, but pre-judgment interest and attorneys' fees were improperly awarded.