KENNETH T. LYONS, APPELLANT,
v.
OWEN LEWIS WYMAN AND WINSTON B. BROWN INVESTMENTS, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEES
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 trial court erred in calculating and compounding interest on a loan when no contractual agreement for interest existed, and the statutory rate should have been applied without compounding.
Appellant appealed a trial court's decision regarding interest owed on a loan. The loan had no contractual agreement on interest, and the trial court …
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 Interest Rate cases and more on FLexlaw
ZEIDWIG, HOWARD M., Associate Judge.
Appellant raises several issues on appeal. After careful review of the record, we find that the only reversible error committed by the trial court was improperly calculating and compounding interest due on a loan owed by Appellant. In all other respects, we affirm-
Because there was no contractual agreement regarding the amount of interest that Appellant was to pay on the loan, the trial court should have imposed the statutory rate of interest. Argonaut Ins. Co. v. May Plumbing Co., 474 So. 2d 212, 215 (Fla.1985). Specifically, the statutory rate of six percent should have been assessed on the loan from the loan’s inception in July, 1980, through June, 1982. § 687.01, Fla.Stat. (1981). However, because the statutory rate of interest changed, effective July 1, 1982, from six percent to twelve percent, see Department of Transp. v. M.C.C. of Florida, Inc., 540 So. 2d 834, 835 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), the statutory-rate of twelve percent should have been assessed from the period beginning in July, 1982, through the end of the loan in September, 1989. § 687.01, Fla.Stat. (1989).
We also find that the trial court erred in compounding interest due on the loan because there was never an agreement between the parties that interest would be compounded. See LaFaye v. Presser, 554 So. 2d 610, 611 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Underwriters at Lloyd’s London v. Millar, 627 So. 2d 1188 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), rev. denied, 639 So. 2d 984 (Fla.1994). Accordingly, on remand, we instruct the trial court to recalculate interest due on the loan without compounding the interest due. In all other respects, we affirm the trial court’s decision.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED FOR RECALCULATION OF INTEREST.
PARIENTE and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rotta v. Rotta, 34 So. 3d 107 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)…were or their claimed value. (3) Contrary to the ruling below, the ex-wife was entitled to prejudgment interest on the fixed obligations owed her by the husband. See Argonaut Ins. Co. v. May Plumbing Co., 474 So. 2d 212 (Fla.1985); Lyons v. Wyman, 658 So. 2d 1104 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Nielsen-Miller Construction Co. v. Pantlin/Prescott, Inc., 602 So. 2d 1366 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). The judgment is otherwise affirmed. Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and reversed and remanded in part. RAMIREZ, C.J., concurs.…
-
Brink Distribs., Inc. v. J. Evans Assocs., Inc., 667 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)…run at 8% — the $100,000 award is effectively and improperly devalued. If the full amount [*928] is awarded at once, then postjudgment interest will only be required as long as the judgment remains unpaid. See § 55.03(1), Fla.Stat.; Lyons v. Wyman, 658 So. 2d 1104 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995).1 REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings. W. SHARP and THOMPSON, JJ., and P. PADOVANO, Associate Judge, concur. . This includes postjudgment interest on the costs and fees award as well. See Coggan v. Coggan, 183 So. 2d…
-
PDGS, Ltd. v. Gopal P. Motwani, 729 So. 2d 399 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…r its method of computation. Nevertheless, because we think it clear that compounding interest upon default was error, see Pitts v. Pastore, 561 So. 2d 297, 302 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (requiring express provision for compound interest); Lyons v. Wyman, 658 So. 2d 1104, 1105 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (trial court improperly compounded interest when the parties did not expressly agree to compound interest), we need to determine whether the doctrine of law of the case leaves us room to rectify this error by directing that…
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)
- LaFAYE v. Presser, 554 So. 2d 610 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- Underwriters AT Lloyd's London & Cos. listed on C.A. Hansen Corp. Cover No. 5H04/224 v. Millar, 627 So. 2d 1188 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)
- State v. M.C.C. OF Fla., Inc., 540 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)