Some Interesting Things About Interest
Interest is an “integral part of New York litigation, including judgment enforcement.”There are many intricacies to the rules. This article focuses on the basics every civil litigator should know.
November 13, 2024 at 08:39 AM
6 minute read
Interest is an integral part of New York litigation, including judgment enforcement. There are many intricacies to the rules, but here the focus will be on the basics every civil litigator should know, plus a few other nuggets.
Pre-Judgment Interest
In New York civil practice, judgments are entered by the Clerk of the court, not a judge (or his personal clerk), although a judge can and sometimes will sign a judgment. The attorney for the prevailing party normally will file the proposed judgment with the Clerk. The judgment should have a space for pre-judgment interest, which will be calculated by the Clerk. The clerk will also “tax” (determine) costs and disbursements if you file a “Bill of Costs” with the judgment, as you should. See CPLR 8201 (costs) and CPLR 8301 (disbursements).
A party suing for breach of a contractual right or for interference with the title to, possession, or enjoyment of property is entitled to pre-judgment interest at 9% from the date of the breach or interference. CPLR 5001(a).
If there is a contract specifying a different rate of interest the party is entitled to pre-judgment interest at that rate. If damages were incurred at various times, you get interest either from a “reasonable intermediary date” or from each date damages were incurred.CPLR 5001(b).Interest should be demanded in the complaint or at least in a dispositive motion or at trial. The particulars (accrual date, rate) need not be pleaded.
In actions of an equitable nature, pre-judgment interest is a matter for the court to determine in the exercise of its discretion. The line is not always easy to draw between contract and equity cases. For example, the courts have differed on whether pre-judgment interest on quantum meruit causes of action is mandatory.
In tort and all other cases, pre-judgment interest accrues from the date of liability is determined, not the date of the injury or wrong. For this reason, it can be wise for a plaintiff to move for summary judgment on liability where it is clear; e.g., rear end collisions, construction accidents covered by the Labor Law. The rule is the same in intentional tort cases—no pre-judgment interest from the date of the injury.
Post-Judgment Interest
New York money judgments, except consumer debt judgments, accrue post-judgment interest at 9% simple interest, which is calculated on the whole ball of wax constituting the final judgment amount; that is, the principal amount of damages, pre-judgment interest, and costs and disbursements.
CPLR 5004 was amended in 2021 to reduce the post-judgment interest on judgments on consumer debt obligations to 2%. Interest accrues up to the date any judgment is satisfied. Judgments are valid for 20 years but remember that judgment liens on real property expire after just 10 years, CPLR 5203(a), but they can be extended.
A judgment creditor will not be denied post-judgment interest simply because he was dilatory in enforcing his judgment or in demanding payment. A judgment debtor who wishes to stop the accrual of interest should tender payment in full. See ERHAL Holding Corp. v. Rusin, 252 A.D.2d 473 (2d Dep’t 1998).
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 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 AllAttorney Fee Reimbursement for Non-Party Subpoena Recipients Under CPLR 3122(d)
6 minute readRudy Giuliani Loses Bid to Dismiss $1.3 Million Davidoff Hutcher & Citron Suit Over Unpaid Legal Fees
Plaintiff Who Hasn't Paid Legal Bills Can't Pursue Equitable Relief in Malpractice Claim, Judge Rules
Referee Recommends $3 Million in Attorney Fees on $500,000 Judgment
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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