PINE RIDGE AT HAVERHILL CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., A FLORIDA NOT FOR PROFIT CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
HOVNANIAN OF PALM BEACH II, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, 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 affirmed the judgment on construction defect damages but reversed the denial of prejudgment interest from the turnover date and the award of attorney's fees, holding that the jury verdict implicitly fixed the date of loss.
Prejudgment interest must be awarded on construction defect damages from the condominium turnover date when the jury verdict implicitly fixes that date as the date of loss.
[1] When a jury verdict awards damages for construction defects, the verdict implicitly fixes the date of loss at the date of property turnover for purposes of calculating pr…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“The jury finding in this regard had the effect of fixing the damages at no later than the turnover date of the condominium property to the association which was in January 1985.”
Court explaining why the jury verdict implicitly fixed the date of loss for prejudgment interest purposes.
A condominium association sued the developer for construction defects including inadequate lighting and improper window installation causing water int…
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 Date Of Loss cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the final judgment on appeal except as to the determination of prejudgment interest and attorney’s fees.
After verdict appellant moved to assess prejudgment interest which was denied because the jury’s damage verdict did not specifically fix a date of loss. We disagree. The jury verdict awarded damages for construction defects in the appellant’s condominium complex, including failure to install adequate lighting and failure to properly install windows resulting in water intrusion. The jury finding in this regard had the effect of fixing the damages at no later than the turnover date of the condominium property to the association which was in January 1985. Therefore, prejudgment interest should have been awarded on those claims from that date. See Bergen Brunswig Corp. v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Serv., 415 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), approved in Argonaut Ins. Co. v. May Plumbing Co., 474 So. 2d 212 (Fla.1985).
Because we reverse for an award of prejudgment interest, we also reverse the award to appellee of attorney’s fees pursuant to an offer of judgment. It appears to us that after the calculation of prejudgment interest, the amount recovered will not be over 25% less than the offer. Therefore the trial court’s award on the basis of appellant’s rejection of the offer would be in error. Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
ANSTEAD and WARNER, JJ., and OWEN, WILLIAM C., Jr., Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Centex-Rooney Constr. Co., Inc. v. Martin Cnty., 706 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)…e damages as of a date certain. Argonaut Ins. Co. v. May Plumbing Co., 474 So. 2d 212, 214-15 (Fla.1985); Alvarado v. Rice, 614 So. 2d 498, 499 (Fla.1993). In Pine Ridge at Haverhill Condominium Association, Inc. v. Hovnanian of Palm Beach II, Inc., 629 So. 2d 151 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), we held that a jury verdict awarding damages for construction defects in a condominium complex had the effect of fixing damages as of the date on which the owner turned over the property to the condominium association, and that…
-
Berloni S.P.A. v. Della CASA, LLC, 972 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)…r, rejected the argument that a jury had to decide either entitlement to, or the amount of, prejudgment interest. We relied on Argonaut in rejecting this very argument in Pine Ridge at Haverhill Condominium Ass’n v. Hovnanian of Palm Beach II, Inc., 629 So. 2d 151 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), involving a claim for construction defects to an association’s condominium complex. The trial court denied prejudgment interest because the jury’s damage verdict did not specifically [*1012] fix a date of the loss. We concluded…
-
Siedlecki v. Arabia, 699 So. 2d 1040 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)…74 So. 2d 212 (Fla.1985). Appellants’ argument that prejudgment interest is precluded because the date of Arabia’s loss has not been specified is meritless. As we held in Pine Ridge at Haverhill Condominium Ass’n v. Hovnanian of Palm Beach II, Inc., 629 So. 2d 151 (Fla 4th DCA 1993), the jury’s award of damages for fraud had the effect of fixing damages as of the date that the fraud was discovered and Arabia discontinued his work for BIC. See Getelman v. Levey, 481 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). Therefore, w…
Previewing 3 of 6 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)
- 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)