LAWRENCE ZUCKER, ETC., ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
SEARS ROEBUCK AND COMPANY, APPELLEE
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.
Zucker, as trustee of a dissolved corporation, appealed a worthless check judgment in favor of Sears. The court affirmed the award of treble damages under Florida law but reversed the award of prejudgment interest calculated on the treble damages themselves, holding that prejudgment interest serves as restitution for loss of use of money, not as a penalty.
Prejudgment interest may not be awarded on statutory treble damages. The award of treble damages is affirmed, but the prejudgment interest calculation must be reversed and recomputed to exclude interest on the treble damages portion.
[1] Prejudgment interest is awarded as restitution to compensate a plaintiff for the loss of use of money, not as a penalty.
[2] Statutory treble damages awarded in a worthless check action are a penalty and are not subject to prejudgment interest.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Prejudgment interest is not ordered as a penalty but rather as restitution to compensate a plaintiff for the loss of use of its money over the period of time that a plaintiff is wrongfully deprived of the use of that money.”
Establishes the fundamental purpose of prejudgment interest as restitution, not punishment, which is the key distinction rejecting prejudgment interest on statutory penalties.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSears sued Preferred Associates, Inc. for a worthless check that was refused due to lack of funds. Sears obtained a judgment that included the face am…
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 Penalties cases and more on FLexlaw
GOSHORN, Chief Judge.
Lawrence Zucker, as trustee of the assets of Preferred Associates, Inc., a dissolved Florida corporation, appeals the final judgment entered in favor of Sears Roebuck and Company in Sears’ worthless check action against Preferred. In addition to the face amount of the check, Sears was awarded treble damages pursuant to section 68.065(1), Florida Statutes (1989)1 and prejudgment interest. Prejudgment interest was calculated on both the face amount of the check and the treble damages. After careful review of the record, we affirm the judgment except for the award of prejudgment interest related to the statutory treble damages.
Sears argues that prejudgment interest on the statutory treble damage award is proper, relying on section 68.-065(2), Florida Statutes (1989) which provides, "In the event that a judgment or decree is entered, interest ... may be added toward the total amount due.” We reject Sears’ interpretation of the statute because it would result in prejudgment interest being awarded on a statutory penalty. Prejudgment interest is not ordered as a penalty but rather as restitution to compensate a plaintiff for the loss of use of its money over the period of time that a plaintiff is wrongfully deprived of the use of that money. Stated differently, prejudgment interest is ordered as restitution, not retribution. Argonaut Insurance Co. v. May Plumbing Co., 474 So. 2d 212 (Fla.1985). Accordingly the award of prejudgment interest insofar as it relates to the treble damage award is reversed with instructions to recompute the interest in accordance with this opinion.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED with instructions.
DAUKSCH and W. SHARP, JJ., concur. . Section 68.065(1) provides in relevant part: (1) In any civil action brought for the purpose of collecting a check, draft, or order of payment, the payment of which was refused by the drawee because of the lack of funds, credit, or an account, and where the maker or drawer fails to pay the amount owing, in cash, to the payee within 30 days following a written demand therefor, as provided in subsection (3), the maker or drawer shall be liable to the payee, in addition to the amount owing upon such check, draft, or order, for damages of triple the amount so owing.