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

• Perkins State Bank v. Connolly
  632 F.2d 1306· 5th Cir.· 1980-12-19 ·cited 31×
  The court held that Florida law, not federal law, governs attorney's fees in this diversity interpleader action among claimants, and Florida law does not permit recovery of attorney's fees for bad faith or under the UCC conversion statute cited. However, Florida law does allow re
• United States v. Ernestine Horton
  622 F.2d 144· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-23 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in granting a new trial, appointing a special master, or entering partial summary judgments, and that the government was entitled to recover Medicare overpayments.
• Island Hoppers, Ltd. v. Norma Beard Keith for the Estate of Marsha K. Beard
  820 So. 2d 967· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-05-29 ·cited 30×
  Island Hoppers appeals a trial court's award of attorneys' fees to the estate of a diver who died during an Island Hoppers dive charter. The Fourth District affirms the fee award, including a contingency risk multiplier of 2.3, and addresses whether trial courts may apply conting
• Mo. Pac. R.R. Co. v. Kan. GAS & Elec. Co.
  862 F.2d 796· 10th Cir.· 1988-12-01 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the Industrial Track Agreement clearly obligated KG&E to indemnify MoPac for the employee's injury, that the settlement was reasonable, and that MoPac was entitled to prejudgment interest and attorneys' fees.
• Kern OIL & Ref. Co. v. Tenneco OIL Co.
  840 F.2d 730· 9th Cir.· 1988-03-07 ·cited 30×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that Tenneco breached its contract and committed fraud, and that the district court properly exercised jurisdiction and awarded damages and sanctions.
• Rubie Rogers v. Okin
  821 F.2d 22· 1st Cir.· 1987-06-12 ·cited 30×
  The court held that plaintiffs were prevailing parties, but current hourly rates could not be used to compensate for delay due to Eleventh Amendment immunity; historical rates must be applied, and a deduction is made for duplicative fee litigation hours.
• Amax Coal Co. v. Dir., Off. OF Workers' Comp. Programs, United States Dep't of Labor
  801 F.2d 958· 7th Cir.· 1986-09-18 ·cited 30×
  The court held that a single credible physician's opinion is sufficient to invoke the interim presumption of total disability due to pneumoconiosis, and that the employer failed to rebut this presumption with speculative medical evidence.
• Wyatt v. Penrod Drilling Co.
  735 F.2d 951· 5th Cir.· 1984-07-09 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence on maintenance and cure, refusing a special jury instruction on a supervisor's duty, or denying prejudgment interest under federal maritime law.
• Bernadette Ingraham v. Dade Cnty. Sch. Bd.
  450 So. 2d 847· Fla.· 1984-05-17 ·cited 30×
  The 25 percent statutory limitation on attorney's fees provided in section 768.28(8), Florida Statutes, applies to the entire settlement amount in cases involving state agency liability, including settlements paid from insurance coverage purchased under section 286.28, regardless
• Napolean S. Ambromovage v. United Mine Workers OF Am.
  726 F.2d 972· 3d Cir.· 1984-01-25 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the Union's loans to the Fund were available for set-off against its liability for uncollected royalties, and that the district court had jurisdiction over the set-off claim for later loans.
• Hanna v. Am. Motors Corp.
  724 F.2d 1300· 7th Cir.· 1984-01-09 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the district court erred in finding that Hanna failed to mitigate damages by attending school, as his enrollment was for immediate income and he remained willing to work. The court also found AMC failed to prove a reasonable likelihood of comparable employment
• E. AIR Lines, Inc. v. Atl. Richfield Co.
  712 F.2d 1402· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1983-06-15 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the district court properly vacated a prior partial summary judgment, correctly determined the class of purchaser and May 15, 1973 price, disallowed retroactive reallocation of costs, correctly computed damages, and properly denied attorney's fees and treble d
• Snead Constr. Corp. v. Langerman
  369 So. 2d 591· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-07-12 ·cited 30×
  Snead Construction appealed a judgment awarding Avanti Construction $67,603.26 for incomplete subcontract work on two hotels, along with prejudgment interest and attorney's fees. The court affirmed the judgment and interest award but reversed the attorney's fees award, holding th
• Norman v. Llewellyn P. Young
  422 F.2d 470· 10th Cir.· 1970-03-05 ·cited 30×
  The court held that a default judgment was permissible due to the defendants' willful failure to comply with discovery orders, distinguishing the case from precedents where good faith attempts to comply were made. However, the court remanded for correction of an error in the calc
• Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Johnson
  155 F.2d 185· 5th Cir.· 1946-02-01 ·cited 30×
  The court clarified that the parties' conduct and circumstances defined the 'use' of gas under their contract, and that an accounting action could proceed at law. The statute of limitations for breach of contract runs from when installments are due, unless fraudulent concealment
• E. Ave., LLC v. Insignia Bank
  136 So. 3d 659· Fla. 2d DCA· 2014-01-17 ·cited 29×
  East Avenue appealed an amended summary final judgment on three counts while other interrelated counts remained pending in the circuit court. The court treated the appeal as a certiorari petition and granted it, holding that a trial court improperly issued an executable final jud
• In & for New Castle Cnty. Transched Sys. Ltd. v. C.A. No. 07C-08-286 WCC Versyss Transit Solutions, LLC
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2012-03-29 ·cited 29×
  The court denied the plaintiff's motion for attorneys' fees, finding that the indemnity clause in the asset purchase agreement did not clearly and unequivocally express an intent to cover first-party litigation. The court granted the plaintiff's request for certain costs, includi
• Raymond James & Assocs., Inc. v. Godshall
  851 So. 2d 879· Fla. 1st DCA· 2003-08-12 ·cited 29×
  An appeal from an order granting partial summary judgment is premature if related claims remain pending, even if the order contains language of finality.
• Peavy v. Dyer
  605 So. 2d 1330· Fla. 5th DCA· 1992-10-16 ·cited 29×
  In a real estate commission dispute, the trial court awarded judgment including prejudgment interest, then assessed post-judgment interest on the entire judgment amount including the prejudgment interest component. The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that post-ju
• United States v. Smith
  944 F.2d 618· 9th Cir.· 1991-09-17 ·cited 29×
  The court held that a district court's restitution order may be reversed if it lacks adequate factual support in the record, even if the court stated it considered the statutory factors. The court also held that the proper valuation of collateral for restitution purposes is the v
• Randolph v. Laeisz
  896 F.2d 964· 5th Cir.· 1990-03-23 ·cited 29×
  The dissenting opinion argues that an uncle who committed sexual batteries on his niece while residing in her grandparents' home should be considered a person responsible for the child's welfare under the child abuse registry statute.
• Cleo D. Mathis & Vico Prods. Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Spears
  857 F.2d 749· Fed. Cir.· 1988-09-06 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the imposition of sanctions on appeal was unwarranted, despite affirming the award of expert witness fees.
• Bartholomew v. CNG Producing Co.
  832 F.2d 326· 5th Cir.· 1987-11-17 ·cited 29×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, finding sufficient evidence of the defendant's negligence and upholding the award of prejudgment and postjudgment interest.
• F.H. Krear & Co. v. Nineteen Named Trustees
  810 F.2d 1250· 2d Cir.· 1987-01-20 ·cited 29×
  The court affirmed the damage awards for breach of contract but vacated the attorneys' fees award, remanding for a recalculation based on specific conditions.
• Kossman v. Calumet Cnty.
  800 F.2d 697· 7th Cir.· 1986-09-10 ·cited 29×
  The court held that Calumet County willfully violated the ADEA by mandatorily retiring plaintiffs at age 55, entitling them to liquidated damages, and that the trial court erred in failing to consider overtime and insurance benefits for the backpay award.
• Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass'n v. Giordano
  485 So. 2d 453· Fla. 3d DCA· 1986-03-04 ·cited 29×
  Florida Insurance Guaranty Association (FIGA) appealed a summary judgment requiring it to pay $150,000 under a settlement agreement for a wrongful death action, while the estate cross-appealed the denial of attorney's fees and interest. The court affirmed FIGA's payment obligatio
• In re AIR Crash Disaster Near NEW Orleans v. PAN Am. World Airways, Inc.
  767 F.2d 1151· 5th Cir.· 1985-08-12 ·cited 29×
  The court held that while some damage awards were excessive and reversed them, others were affirmed, and a new trial was granted on specific claims unless a remittitur was accepted.
• Litton Sys., Inc. v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co.
  746 F.2d 168· 2d Cir.· 1984-10-16 ·cited 29×
  The 1982 amendment to 28 U.S.C. § 1961, changing the post-judgment interest rate calculation, should not be applied retroactively to judgments entered before its effective date, even if pending on direct appeal.
• Brink v. DaLESIO
  667 F.2d 420· 4th Cir.· 1981-11-05 ·cited 29×
  The court held that one plaintiff had standing to represent an employee benefit fund and that post-judgment intervention should have been allowed for another fund, while also requiring greater monetary relief including prejudgment interest.
• LaFAYE v. Presser
  554 So. 2d 610· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-12-20 ·cited 28×
  In this appeal following remand, the court addresses the proper calculation of prejudgment interest in a contractual dispute. The trial court correctly awarded prejudgment interest at the contractual rate of six percent from the date of loss through judgment, but erred by imposin
• United States v. R.W. Meyer, Inc.
  889 F.2d 1497· 6th Cir.· 1989-11-20 ·cited 28×
  The court held that indirect costs are recoverable under CERCLA as part of the total response costs, and that the SARA amendment authorizing prejudgment interest could be applied retroactively.
• Pitre v. W. Elec. Co., Inc.
  843 F.2d 1262· 10th Cir.· 1988-03-29 ·cited 28×
  The court held that evidence of past discrimination is probative of current discriminatory intent and that statistical evidence, even if not statistically significant to social scientists, can be relevant in Title VII cases when considered with other evidence.
• Empire GAS Corp. v. Am. Bakeries Co.
  840 F.2d 1333· 7th Cir.· 1988-02-16 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the jury instruction regarding the "unreasonably disproportionate" proviso in Illinois' Uniform Commercial Code § 2-306(1) was erroneous, requiring reversal and a new trial.
• McISAAC v. Didriksen Fishing Corp.
  809 F.2d 129· 1st Cir.· 1987-01-13 ·cited 28×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's finding of negligence against Wise Company, but that the district court abused its discretion in revoking its order for a new trial on damages. The court also held that Wise's right of contribution from Didri
• United States v. Sleight
  808 F.2d 1012· 3d Cir.· 1987-01-12 ·cited 28×
  The court held that restitution ordered as a condition of probation under the Federal Probation Act may be based on the court's factual findings of loss, not solely on amounts alleged in the indictment, and that postjudgment interest is permissible, but prejudgment interest is no
• James B. Lansing Sound, Inc. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. OF Pittsburgh, PA
  801 F.2d 1560· 9th Cir.· 1986-10-15 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the policy's ambiguity regarding the measure of loss requires using the wholesale price rather than the manufacturing cost, and that freight payments are not an additional recoverable loss.
• Brocklesby v. United States
  767 F.2d 1288· 9th Cir.· 1985-02-15 ·cited 28×
  The court held that an indemnity agreement was admissible to show the relationship between parties and impeach witnesses, and that a chart manufacturer could be held strictly liable for defects in its product even if the defect originated from a government-supplied procedure.
• Computer Sys. Eng'g, Inc. v. Qantel Corp.
  740 F.2d 59· 1st Cir.· 1984-07-11 ·cited 28×
  The court concurs with the majority opinion but raises concerns about jury prejudice from punitive damages evidence and the need for sua sponte judicial intervention in cases of improper argument.
• Stevens v. East-West Towing Co., Inc.
  649 F.2d 1104· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-06 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the barge was not unseaworthy and the charterer was not negligent, and alternatively, that the tug's breach of its warranty of workmanlike performance barred recovery.
• United States v. Motor Vessel Gopher State
  614 F.2d 1186· 8th Cir.· 1980-02-12 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the district court's findings regarding the unreasonableness of the government's claimed repair costs were not clearly erroneous, but remanded for a redetermination of prejudgment interest at a higher rate.
• Hennessy v. Schmidt
  583 F.2d 302· 7th Cir.· 1978-07-26 ·cited 28×
  The court held that an appeal from an order denying a motion for a new trial will be treated as an appeal from the underlying judgment if the appellant's intent to appeal the judgment is clear and no prejudice results. The court affirmed the district court's judgment awarding a b
• Twin City Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Transamerica Ins. Co.
  491 F.2d 1122· 8th Cir.· 1974-02-14 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the doctrine of election of remedies did not bar the plaintiff's claim, but vacated the judgment because the district court exceeded the scope of the parties' submission by making factual findings and legal conclusions not presented for decision.
• Mid-America Transp. Co., Inc. v. Rose Barge Line, Inc.
  477 F.2d 914· 8th Cir.· 1973-05-07 ·cited 28×
  The court held that prejudgment interest should be awarded in admiralty cases unless exceptional circumstances exist, and that the trial court erred in denying it based on the absence of dilatory action or frivolous defenses.
• Leopoldo Sandoval v. Mitsui Sempaku K. K. Tokyo
  460 F.2d 1163· 5th Cir.· 1972-05-23 ·cited 28×
  The court held that Mitsui was entitled to indemnity from the Canal Company, that a one-third contingency fee was reasonable under FECA, and that prejudgment interest could not be raised for the first time on appeal.
• United States ex rel. Carter-Schneider-Nelson, Inc. v. Campbell
  293 F.2d 816· 9th Cir.· 1961-08-17 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the trial court correctly denied prejudgment interest because the damages were unliquidated and affirmed the denial of recovery against the surety due to inadequate Miller Act notice.
• Berloni S.P.A. v. Della CASA, LLC
  972 So. 2d 1007· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-01-02 ·cited 27×
  Berloni, an Italian supplier, sued Della Casa for unpaid goods sold under a breach of contract theory. The trial court reduced the jury's verdict based on partial releases and denied prejudgment interest, but the appellate court reversed, holding that the jury properly interprete
• Griefer v. DiPIETRO
  708 So. 2d 666· Fla. 4th DCA· 1998-04-08 ·cited 27×
  In a second trial of a personal injury case stemming from a pedestrian accident, the trial court excluded the plaintiff's human factors expert and denied rebuttal testimony, committing reversible error. The appellate court reversed, finding the exclusion of expert testimony to be
• Jules Simeon, Sr. v. T. Smith & SON, Inc.
  852 F.2d 1421· 5th Cir.· 1988-08-10 ·cited 27×
  The court held that concurrent tortfeasors in maritime law are jointly and severally liable, even when the plaintiff is contributorily negligent, and this rule applies to a Jones Act defendant alongside a general maritime law defendant. The court also found that the jury's award
• Sissel Cooper v. AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co.
  485 So. 2d 1367· Fla. 2d DCA· 1986-04-02 ·cited 27×
  The court held that prejudgment interest was not recoverable, but the trial court erred in retroactively applying a statute to limit attorney fees.
• Williams v. Tri-County Growers, Inc.
  747 F.2d 121· 3d Cir.· 1984-10-22 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the employer violated FLSA record-keeping requirements and FLCRA provisions regarding statements of sums paid and record maintenance, but remanded the issue of liquidated damages under FLSA for further findings. The court also reversed the denial of a claim fo