Pre-Judgement Interest and Stipulations of Liability Under CPLR 5002
In his New York Practice column, Thomas F. Gleason writes: CPLR 5002 allows for interest to accrue after a decision establishing liability, even though the amount upon which the interest is running is not yet known and will not be determined until the damages phase of the case. Many cases have examined that which constitutes a "verdict, report or decision" under CPLR 5002. What about a stipulation that a defendant is liable on a personal injury claim, or a "high-low" agreement that fixes a range of liability?
September 15, 2017 at 02:03 PM
8 minute read
Interest rates reflect the time value of money, and as the Court of Appeals held in Love v. State of New York, 78 N.Y.2d 540 (1991), the award of damages includes interest because it is intended to make the plaintiff whole. Until the defendant pays the damages, he or she is said to be “holding funds that belong to the plaintiff.” Id. at 544.
This rationale implies an entitlement to interest from accrual of the cause of action at market rates, but this is not the New York rule. Market interest rates currently are pretty low (the federal funds rate is only 1 percent), and the longstanding 9 percent rate provided by CPLR 5004 may reflect a policy to incentivize prompt payment of judgments. Regardless of the reason for the 9 percent rate, however, the particulars of interest calculations for civil damages in New York are matters of high consequence.
The calculation rules are provided in CPLR Article 50, see Manufacturers & Traders Trust Co. v. Reliance Ins. Co., 8 N.Y.3d 583, 588 (2007), which generally covers judgments. The basics are stated in §§5001 through 5004 and for the most part are well-settled. Professor Siegel has succinctly described the calculation points—from the time of the cause of action, through the decision, the judgment and finally up to payment. See Siegel, New York Practice (Fifth Edition), §§ 411, 412.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDecision of the Day: Attorney in Social Security Case Awarded Fees, But Must Pay Client Refund Under Equal Access to Justice Act
The Changing Landscape of NY Courts' Jurisdiction Over Out-of-State Corporations
14 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Friday Newspaper
- 2Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 3Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 4NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 5A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250