THE BILLBURG CORPORATION, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
ACCOUNTING GROUP, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
The Billburg Corporation (Billburg) appeals a final judgment in its favor which Billburg argues was inadequate and inconsistent with the evidence. We find merit in only one issue raised by Billburg.
In a nonjury trial, the trial court entered a judgment in favor of Billburg in the amount of $9,250. The trial court failed to award Billburg prejudgment interest. That was error. Billburg was entitled to prejudgment interest from the time the payments of the principal amounts were due. See Argonaut Ins. Co. v. May Plumbing Co., 474 So. 2d 212 (Fla.1985).
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings to award prejudgment interest.
SCHEB, A.C.J., and HALL and PARKER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mendez v. State, 678 So. 2d 388 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…ause his minivan was a disabled vehicle obstructing traffic, defendant could be legally detained for a traffic violation, and the officer was thus authorized to order defendant to exit the vehicle. See § 316.071, Fla. Stat. (1993); Stanley v. State, 559 So. 2d 460, 461 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); State v. Bernard, 650 So. 2d 100, 102 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). More importantly, it appeared that defendant, who was in control of the vehicle, was intoxicated and acting furtively. The officer was justified in ordering defendan…
-
State v. Mahoy, 575 So. 2d 779 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)…the Fourth Amendment’s proscription against unreasonable searches and seizures. New York v. Class, 475 U.S. 106, 106 S.Ct. 960, 89 L.Ed.2d 81 (1986); Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106, 98 S.Ct. 330, 54 L.Ed.2d 331 (1977). Accord Stanley v. State, 559 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). This is so even though the police officer lacks any particularized reason to believe that the driver possesses a weapon or poses a threat. New York v. Class, 106 S.Ct. at 967. As the Supreme Court explained, this procedure simpl…
-
State v. Wikso, 738 So. 2d 390 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…concedes that the facts disclose that the officer was initially unable to read the tag. Yet he maintains that when the tag became legible as the officer approached the stopped vehicle, the encounter should have been terminated. In Stanley v. State, 559 So. 2d 460, 461 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), we held that: “Once a motor vehicle has been lawfully detained for a traffic violation, the police officer may order the driver to exit the vehicle without violating the fourth amendment’s proscription of unreasonable sear…
Previewing 3 of 9 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)