WABASH FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, AN INDIANA CORPORATION LICENSED TO DO BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
W. V. HOLLOWAY, ALLEN MAIDA AND ECY MAIDA, 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.
A trial judge cannot add interest to a jury verdict if the jury did not award it as damages.
A contractor sued an insurance company for breach of an employment contract. The jury returned a verdict for the contractor, but did not include inter…
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 Interest On Damages cases and more on FLexlaw
The Wabash Fire and Casualty Insurance Company, one of the defendants in the trial court, appeals a final judgment for the plaintiff entered upon a jury verdict. The action was by W. V. Holloway, a building contractor, who alleged in his complaint that the defendant-insurance company entered into a contract of employment with him, and subsequent to the completion of the work involved in the contract refused to pay.
The basic question is whether the evidence is sufficient on the issue of employment to support the verdict. The judgment for the amount of the contract is approved upon authority of Board of Public Instruction for St. Lucie County v. Connor, 148 Fla. 364, 4 So.2d 382, wherein the Supreme Court of Florida recognized an implied contract arising from the acts, conduct and circumstances surrounding the dealings of the parties.
An additional question is presented as to the propriety of including in the judgment an amount specified as interest. The complaint claimed interest as an element of damages. The verdict was for an amount which apparently did not include interest. In the final judgment the trial judge added to the amount of the verdict a sum approximately equal to interest at the rate of six percent on the amount due. Interest was computed from the date upon which the complaint alleged it became due up to the date of the judgment.
Where interest is an element of damages and the jury does not return an amount for interest, the trial judge is not authorized to include interest in the judgment. Shoup v. Waits, 91 Fla. 378, 107 So. 769; Bailey v. Swartz, Fla.App.1957, 97 So.2d 310.
*146The judgment, except for the inclusion of an amount as interest, is affirmed and the cause remanded to the trial court for the entry of an amended judgment in conformance with the verdict and the views expressed herein.
Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Milohnich v. First Nat'l Bank OF Miami Springs, 224 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)…of the banking tradeas -described by the majority. In either event, the trier of fact must decide whether such an implied contract exists (see Welborn v. Kemp, 141 Fla. 89, 192 So. 469 [1939]; Wabash Fire and Casualty Co. v. Holloway, Fla.App.1962, 139 So. 2d 145) or whether such a method of dealing is a usage of the banking trade (see § 671.1 — 205[2], Fla.Stat. [1967], F. S.A.) It should be noted at this point that a plaintiff reiving on an implied contract has a greater burden of proof than one who protec…
-
Commodore Plaza AT Century 21 Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. Cohen, 350 So. 2d 502 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)…. In actions at law, interest and attorney fees are properly recoverable as a part of damages in a breach of contract case and, as such, are to be determined by the jury where a case is tried by a jury. Wabash Fire and Casualty Company v. Holloway, 139 So. 2d 145 (Fla. 3rd D.C.A. 1962); Riess v. Goldman, 196 So. 2d 184 (Fla. 3rd D.C.A. 1967); Grayson v. Fishlove, 266 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 3rd D.C.A. 1972); Franklin v. Boyd, 272 So. 2d 191 (Fla. 3rd D.C.A. 1972); Schulman v. Cort Aviation Corporation, 330 So. 2d 11…
-
Vacation Prizes, Inc. v. City Nat'l Bank OF Miami Beach, 227 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969)…App.1957, 97 So. 2d 310, reaffirmed the cases set forth above in saying that in a claim for damages the trial court is without authority to add interest to the verdict of a jury. Wabash Fire and Casualty Insurance Company v. Holloway, Fla.App.1962, 139 So. 2d 145, reiterates the rule in holding that interest is not properly included in a judgment where plaintiff claimed interest as an element of damages for defendant’s refusal to pay for certain completed work and the jury did not award an amount for interes…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Shoup v. Waits, 91 Fla. 378 (Fla. 1926)
- Carroll Bailey v. Swartz, 97 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 3d DCA 1957)
- Bd. Pub. Instruction for Cty. of St. Lucie v. Connor, 148 Fla. 364 (Fla. 1941)