BLOCH EQUIPMENT COMPANY, INC., APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
NATIONAL MEDICAL INDUSTRIES, INC. D/B/A ADVANCED PHYSICAL THERAPY EQUIPMENT, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the trial judge's decision in a breach of contract action was supported by substantial competent evidence, but the denial of prejudgment interest was an error.
Plaintiff sued defendant for breach of contract. Following a non-jury trial, the court entered a judgment for the defendant (cross-appellee).…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Statutory Rate cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the judgment for Bloch Equipment Company, Inc. as cross-appellee this breach of contract action on the ground that there is substantial competent evidence, although disputed, to support the decision of the trial judge following the non-jury trial. Hetman v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R., 349 So. 2d 1187 (Fla.1977); Marsh v. Marsh, 419 So. 2d 629 (Fla.1982), pet. for review dismissed, 427 So. 2d 737 (Fla.1983).
Having found the cross-appellee was entitled to a judgment, the trial court erred in denying Bloch’s demand as appellant for prejudgment interest. When a verdict liquidates damages on a plaintiffs out-of-pocket pecuniary losses, plaintiff is entitled, as a matter of law, to prejudgment interest at the statutory rate from the date of loss. Argonaut Ins. Co. v. May Plumbing Co., 474 So. 2d 212 (Fla.1985); see also Wong v. New Prospect Enter., Inc., 488 So. 2d 647 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Morcyl Distrib. Co. v. Farrelly, 477 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), review denied, 486 So. 2d 595 (Fla.1986).
The judgment for cross-appellee is affirmed. The order denying its claim for prejudgment interest is reversed and the cause is remanded with directions to award interest on the amount of the judgment, at the statutory rate, from the date of loss.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Andrew H. Boros, P.A. v. Arnold P. Carter, M.D., P.A., 537 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…it is the duty of the trial court to evaluate the weight and credibility of the testimony. Marsh v. Marsh, 419 So. 2d 629 (Fla.1982); Helman v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R., 349 So. 2d 1187 (Fla.1977); Bloch Equip. Co. v. National Medical Indus., Inc., 539 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). The trial court resolved the conflict by ruling in favor of Dr. Carter; it is not the function of this court to reweigh the evidence. Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So. 2d 13, 16 (Fla.1976). Finding that competent substantial evidence support…
-
Bellucci v. Moore, 585 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)…etent evidence supporting the trial court’s finding that the costs of repairs were less than 3% of the [*492] purchase price. The lower court’s findings should not be disturbed by this court. Bloch Equipment Co., Inc. v. National Medical Ind., Inc., 539 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Deakyne v. Deakyne, 460 So. 2d 582 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). The Moores argue that they are entitled to prejudgment interest, citing Kissimmee Utility Authority v. Better Plastics, Inc., 526 So. 2d 46 (Fla.1988), and Argonaut Insuran…
-
Open Permit Servs. OF Fla., Inc. v. Curtiss, 15 So. 3d 822 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)…205, 1206 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). The trial court’s findings of fact are reviewed under the substantial competent evidence standard of review. See, e.g., Bellucci v. Moore, 585 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); Bloch Equip. Co. v. Nat’l Med. Indus., Inc., 539 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). Curtiss had the burden of proving that he was not responsible for the loss of the fixtures. See Hough, v. Menses, 95 So. 2d 410 (Fla.1957); Henderson, 340 So. 2d at 1206 (holding that burden of proof is on the vendor where a part…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Argonaut Ins. Co. v. MAY Plumbing Co., 474 So. 2d 212 (Fla. 1985)
- Helman v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co. & William A. Cagle, 349 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. 1977)
- Marsh v. Laurel J. Ising Marsh, 419 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 1982)
- Wong v. NEW Prospect Enters., Inc., 488 So. 2d 647 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)
- Joseph T. Horgan, M.D. v. S. Broward Hosp. Dist., 477 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)