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

• Cioffe v. Arnold F. Morris & Jet Fingers, Inc.
  676 F.2d 539· 11th Cir.· 1982-05-17 ·cited 37×
  The court held that the trial court correctly struck the award based on an account stated theory because the issue was not tried by consent, but reversed the denial of prejudgment interest on contract damages.
• Bricklayers' Pension Tr. Fund v. Danilo Taiariol
  671 F.2d 988· 6th Cir.· 1982-03-09 ·cited 37×
  The court held that 28 U.S.C. § 1961 does not preclude an award of prejudgment interest in cases where jurisdiction is based on a federal question, and such interest may be awarded under the LMRA and ERISA if it furthers congressional purposes.
• Michael and Melissa Stone v. Compuserve Interactive Servs., Inc.
  804 So. 2d 383· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-10-03 ·cited 36×
  The Stones sued CompuServe for breach of contract after failing to receive a $400 rebate within the promised timeframe. The court affirmed denial of class certification due to lack of predominating common issues and varying state law, but reversed summary judgment dismissal becau
• C.D. Joiner v. City OF MacOn
  814 F.2d 1537· 11th Cir.· 1987-04-20 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the district court erred in limiting liquidated damages to the period after its initial liability finding, as the employer could not establish good faith after a relevant Department of Labor policy change.
• Lazzara v. Howard A. Esser, Inc.
  802 F.2d 260· 7th Cir.· 1986-09-23 ·cited 36×
  The court held that an insurance broker who fails to maintain requested coverage or inform the client of a coverage gap breaches fiduciary duties, and the resulting interest liability on an uncovered judgment is a compensable damage.
• S. Pac. Transp. Co. v. SAN Antonio
  748 F.2d 266· 5th Cir.· 1984-11-29 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by staying execution of the railroads' judgment, and granted mandamus to allow immediate collection, awarding prejudgment interest.
• Mid-Jersey Nat'l Bank v. Fidelity-Mortgage Invs.
  518 F.2d 640· 3d Cir.· 1975-06-16 ·cited 36×
  The court held that a deposit in court pending appeal is not property of the debtor subject to the automatic stay of Bankruptcy Rule 11-44, and that the trial court erred in its award of pre- and post-judgment interest.
• Eleonora R. Sears v. Hartmann H. Pauly
  261 F.2d 304· 1st Cir.· 1958-11-26 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the defendant's appeal, procedurally flawed, could be treated as a motion for a new trial, and that the trial court did not err in its jury instructions regarding the adoption of a Sunday contract or in denying the plaintiff's motion to add pre-judgment intere
• Nat'l Cos. Health Benefit Plan v. ST. Joseph's Hosp. OF Atlanta, Inc.
  929 F.2d 1558· 11th Cir.· 1991-04-30 ·cited 35×
  An ERISA plan sponsor's misrepresentations about continuation coverage rights, upon which an employee justifiably relies to their detriment, can estop the sponsor from denying coverage, even if ERISA itself did not mandate the coverage.
• Ins. Co. OF N. Am. v. M/V Ocean Lynx
  901 F.2d 934· 11th Cir.· 1990-05-18 ·cited 35×
  The court held that carriers' liability was limited under COGSA section 4(5) because they provided adequate notice and opportunity to declare excess value, and that attorneys' fees and prejudgment interest were properly awarded.
• W.L. Smith v. Dunning
  467 So. 2d 465· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-04-18 ·cited 35×
• Laborers Clean-Up Contract Admin. Tr. Fund v. Uriarte Clean-Up Serv., Inc.
  736 F.2d 516· 9th Cir.· 1984-06-29 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the district court erred in calculating prejudgment interest for delinquencies that became due before the amendment of the interest rate provisions, and that the award of attorneys' fees was improper without considering the required factors.
• Myron v. Chicoine
  678 F.2d 727· 7th Cir.· 1982-05-20 ·cited 35×
  The court held that Rosenthal lacked standing to challenge the constitutionality of the appeal bond requirement and that the willfulness issue was waived. The court remanded the prejudgment interest issue for the CFTC to exercise its discretion.
• In re AIR Crash Disaster Near Chicago
  644 F.2d 633· 7th Cir.· 1981-02-17 ·cited 35×
  The court held that while Illinois law generally disallows prejudgment interest, the award in this case was permissible as an adjustment to calculate the present value of pecuniary losses, not as separate prejudgment interest.
• Kennedy Elec. Co., Inc. v. United States Postal Serv.
  508 F.2d 954· 10th Cir.· 1974-12-30 ·cited 35×
  The court held that a subcontractor has an equitable lien on funds remaining with the Postal Service and on funds improperly disbursed by the predecessor Department, even without a Miller Act bond, due to the government's regulatory violations and the subcontractor's unpaid labor
• Kloster Cruise Ltd. v. Grubbs
  762 So. 2d 552· Fla. 3d DCA· 2000-06-28 ·cited 34×
  Norwegian Cruise Line appeals a jury verdict awarding damages to Karen Grubbs for injuries sustained in a slip-and-fall on a cruise ship. The court reverses and remands for a new trial, finding multiple trial errors including improper exclusion of safety testimony, improper 'send
• Golden v. Dodge-Markham Co., Inc.
  1 F. Supp. 2d 1360· M.D. Fla.· 1998-04-17 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the defendant failed to meet its burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, thus federal jurisdiction was lacking.
• Horacio O. Ferrea N. Am. Div., Inc. v. Moroso Performance Prods., Inc.
  553 So. 2d 336· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-12-06 ·cited 34×
  Ferrea sued Moroso for breach of contract and unpaid invoices for automotive engine valves. The trial court awarded compensatory damages but denied prejudgment interest and attorney's fees. The appellate court affirmed the damages award and denial of attorney's fees, but reversed
• Gibraltar Savings v. Ldbrinkman Corp.
  860 F.2d 1275· 5th Cir.· 1988-12-02 ·cited 34×
  The court denied the petition for rehearing, as the factual corrections did not affect the original outcome.
• Kaszuk v. Bakery & Confectionery Union & Indus. Int'l Pension Fund
  791 F.2d 548· 7th Cir.· 1986-05-23 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the Fund's methods of notifying participants about the pre-retirement husband-and-wife pension plan were inadequate under ERISA, and that the Fund failed to prove Mr. Kaszuk had actual notice or would not have elected the option if properly notified.
• U.S. Dominator, Inc. v. Factory Ship Robert E. Resoff
  768 F.2d 1099· 9th Cir.· 1985-08-15 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the magistrate's order allowing amendment was reviewable, the amended claim related back, and the salvage award was not an abuse of discretion.
• Michaels v. Michaels
  767 F.2d 1185· 7th Cir.· 1985-07-03 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the jury could reasonably find that the withheld information about Angus Littlejohn's agreement to contact prospective buyers was material and that the defendants acted with scienter, thus affirming the jury's verdict on the securities fraud claim.
• Williams v. Reading & Bates Drilling Co.
  750 F.2d 487· 5th Cir.· 1985-01-17 ·cited 34×
  The court held that prejudgment interest may be awarded in Jones Act cases tried in admiralty, but not on future damages, and affirmed the district court's findings on causation and economic loss.
• Gulf OIL Corp. v. Dyke
  734 F.2d 797· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1984-04-17 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding prejudgment interest and attorney's fees, and that Fletcher had standing to sue for overcharges.
• Marks v. Prattco, Inc.
  633 F.2d 1122· 5th Cir.· 1981-01-05 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing to hold a hearing, in its findings on reasonable diligence and interim earnings, or in awarding attorneys' fees for the appeal.
• Town OF Longboat KEY v. Carl E. Widell & SON
  362 So. 2d 719· Fla. 2d DCA· 1978-09-27 ·cited 34×
  A contractor sued the Town of Longboat Key to recover the balance due on a wastewater system construction contract plus additional costs incurred when unforeseen tidal water conditions necessitated switching from dry excavation to the more expensive caisson method. The court affi
• Inland Credit Corp. v. M/T BOW Egret
  552 F.2d 1148· 5th Cir.· 1977-05-27 ·cited 34×
  The court held that Earle and Kennard were entitled to lien claimant status and recovery of their principal and interest from the sale proceeds, and that all parties should share the remaining operating fund proportionally.
• First Ala. Bank OF Montgomery, N.A. v. First State Ins. Co., Inc.
  899 F.2d 1045· 11th Cir.· 1990-04-27 ·cited 33×
  The court held that First Alabama's fraud claim was not barred by the statute of limitations and affirmed the district court's finding of fraud, but remanded for recalculation of prejudgment interest.
• Am. Fam. Life Assurance Co. OF Columbus v. United States Fire Co.
  885 F.2d 826· 11th Cir.· 1989-10-10 ·cited 33×
  The court held that insurers were liable for attorney's fees incurred by the insured in defending a malicious prosecution suit and for fees incurred in declaratory judgment actions, but reversed awards for fees incurred in the Missouri declaratory judgment action due to a good fa
• Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Guardian Pools, Inc.
  828 F.2d 1507· 11th Cir.· 1987-10-05 ·cited 33×
  The court held that the district court erred in calculating prejudgment and post-judgment interest rates and in denying back pay as a contempt sanction without considering the purpose of such sanctions.
• Radio Steel & MFG. Co. v. MTD Prods., Inc.
  788 F.2d 1554· Fed. Cir.· 1986-04-18 ·cited 33×
  The court affirmed the district court's damage award, finding that the infringement was not willful and that prejudgment interest was appropriate.
• Miller Indus. v. Caterpillar Tractor Co.
  733 F.2d 813· 11th Cir.· 1984-06-04 ·cited 33×
  A negligent failure to warn of a known product defect, even without physical damage, can form a basis for a maritime tort action if the warranty does not expressly disclaim negligence. Crew members can recover lost wages based on a share of the lost catch when their compensation
• Sauers v. Alaska Barge & Transp., Inc.
  600 F.2d 238· 9th Cir.· 1979-07-09 ·cited 33×
  The court held that the trial court erred in failing to consider inflation's impact on damages but affirmed AB&T's liability and modified the judgment to include prejudgment interest instead of remanding for recalculation.
• Claude v. Pitts, Jr.
  561 So. 2d 297· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-01-05 ·cited 32×
  Claude Pitts borrowed money from neighbors the Pastores and gave them a mortgage on his homestead property without his wife joining the mortgage. After the property's homestead status ended through divorce, the Pastores foreclosed. The court affirmed the foreclosure but reversed
• Reichman v. Bonsignore
  818 F.2d 278· 2d Cir.· 1987-05-11 ·cited 32×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that sufficient evidence supported findings of ADEA and ERISA violations, that liquidated damages and prejudgment interest were properly awarded, and that attorney's fees and costs were reasonable.
• CPG Prods. Corp. v. Pegasus Luggage, Inc.
  776 F.2d 1007· Fed. Cir.· 1985-10-17 ·cited 32×
  The court affirmed the patent infringement and unfair competition judgments but reversed and remanded the denial of increased patent damages and attorney fees due to willful infringement.
• Deakle v. John E. Graham & Sons
  756 F.2d 821· 11th Cir.· 1985-03-29 ·cited 32×
  The court affirmed the employer's liability for unseaworthiness but remanded for a conditional remittitur of the damages award for lost future wages.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. MacDONALD
  699 F.2d 47· 1st Cir.· 1983-02-01 ·cited 32×
  The dissenting judge argues that a district court should have the discretion to order full disgorgement of an insider's ill-gotten gains in an SEC enforcement action, even absent special circumstances.
• Platoro Ltd., Inc. v. The Unidentified Remains OF A Vessel
  695 F.2d 893· 5th Cir.· 1983-01-20 ·cited 32×
  The Texas legislature's resolution waived Eleventh Amendment immunity for federal court, and Platoro is entitled to a salvage award, but only for its one-third share as a joint venturer.
• Carlyle S. Cline v. Roadway Express, Inc.
  689 F.2d 481· 4th Cir.· 1982-09-16 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the district court correctly found age discrimination but erred in its handling of the stock bonus offset against back pay.
• Glus v. The G. C. Murphy Co.
  629 F.2d 248· 3d Cir.· 1980-06-27 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the judiciary should not create federal common law for contribution under a federal statute that does not expressly provide for it, as this is a legislative function.
• United States v. DeBLASIO Constr., Inc.
  588 F.2d 259· 9th Cir.· 1978-10-26 ·cited 32×
  The court held that damages for breach of contract should be limited to contract rates, not quantum meruit, and that prejudgment interest should be awarded on objectively determinable damages.
• United Telecomms., Inc. v. Am. Television & Commc'ns Corp.
  536 F.2d 1310· 10th Cir.· 1976-06-16 ·cited 32×
  The court held that borrowing costs incurred due to a breach of contract are recoverable as damages, distinct from statutory prejudgment interest, and that the exclusion of expert testimony on 'best efforts' was not prejudicial error.
• Agrofollajes, S.A. v. E.I. DU Pont de Nemours & Co., Inc.
  48 So. 3d 976· Fla. 3d DCA· 2010-12-01 ·cited 31×
  Costa Rican leatherleaf fern growers sued Du Pont alleging that Benlate fungicide damaged their crops. The trial court consolidated 27 separate claims into one trial, and the jury awarded identical damages to all plaintiffs. On appeal, the Third District reversed and remanded for
• Leyton F. Perez v. Cir. City Stores, Inc.
  721 So. 2d 409· Fla. 3d DCA· 1998-11-25 ·cited 31×
  In this certified question case, the Third District Court of Appeal held that pre-demand costs must be included when calculating whether a plaintiff's judgment exceeds 125% of a demand for judgment under Florida Statute § 768.79, thereby entitling the plaintiff to attorney's fees
• Park OF Commerce Assocs. v. City OF Delray Beach
  636 So. 2d 12· Fla.· 1994-03-31 ·cited 31×
  The Florida Supreme Court clarified that municipal site plan and development decisions are quasi-judicial actions subject to certiorari review, not legislative actions subject to de novo review. The Court overruled prior precedent holding such decisions to be legislative and appr
• WJM, Inc. v. Mass. Dep't OF Pub. Welf.
  840 F.2d 996· 1st Cir.· 1988-02-24 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the Department of Public Welfare waived its Eleventh Amendment immunity by filing proofs of claim in the nursing homes' bankruptcy proceedings, but erred in awarding prejudgment interest as there was no express waiver for interest.
• Kalima Jenkins v. The State OF Mo.
  838 F.2d 260· 8th Cir.· 1988-01-29 ·cited 31×
  The court affirmed the district court's award of attorneys' fees, finding that compensation for delay in payment was permissible and that the allocation of fees solely against the State was not an abuse of discretion.
• Texaco Inc. v. Pennzoil Co.
  784 F.2d 1133· 2d Cir.· 1986-02-20 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction over Texaco's claims regarding the Texas bonding and lien provisions violating due process and equal protection, but lacked jurisdiction over other claims that constituted an impermissible review of the Texas state court jud
• JAY Edwards, Inc. v. NEW England Toyota Distrib., Inc.
  708 F.2d 814· 1st Cir.· 1983-05-19 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the jury's award for damages during the period the defendant was the distributor was supported by sufficient evidence, but the award for damages after the defendant ceased to be the distributor could not stand due to insufficient evidence and a timely objectio