KENNETH R. MCGURN, AS TRUSTEE OF THE SIMONTON RANCH TRUST, APPELLANT,
v.
STEPHEN A. SCOTT, 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.
The court held that prejudgment interest was improperly awarded because the damages were not fixed as of a prior date certain in the final judgment.
Appellant sought reversal of a final judgment awarding appellee profits from a Trust. The trial court also awarded prejudgment interest in a separate …
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 Liquidated Damages cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant seeks reversal of a final judgment awarding appellee $92,341.99 as his share of the profits earned by a Trust in which both own an interest. Because appellant has failed to demonstrate a basis on the record for reversal, we affirm this final judgment.
However, we do agree that the award of prejudgment interest, which was made in a separate final order,1 was improper. In Argonaut Insurance Co. v. May, 474 So. 2d 212 (Fla.1985), the supreme court approved this court’s decision in Bergen Brunswig Corp. v. State, 415 So. 2d 765, 767 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), where it was stated that “for the purpose of assessing prejudgment interest, a claim becomes liquidated and susceptible of prejudgment interest when a verdict has the effect of fixing damages as of a prior date.” (Emphasis added). In the instant final order, the lower court, which acted as the fact finder, awarded prejudgment interest as of the date of the last day of trial and continuing until the date of entry of the final judgment some eight months later; the lower court did not, however, determine in the final judgment that damages were due as of a date certain prior to the entry of the final judgment. Accordingly, prejudgment interest was improperly awarded.
Therefore, the final judgment is AFFIRMED but the award of prejudgment interest is REVERSED. It should be noted that the award of costs made in the final order entered has not been challenged, and so the award of costs is not disturbed.
BOOTH, SMITH and WEBSTER, JJ., concur. . See, McGurn v. Scott, 573 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), affirmed in part, reversed in part, McGurn v. Scott, 596 So. 2d 1042 (Fla.1992).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Argonaut Ins. Co. v. MAY Plumbing Co., 474 So. 2d 212 (Fla. 1985)
- McGURN v. Scott, 596 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 1992)
- Bergen Brunswig Corp. & Health Application Sys., Inc. v. State of Fla. Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 415 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- McGURN v. Scott, 573 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)