Serna v. Trujillo

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Serna v. Trujillo

664 So. 2d 49, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 12533, 1995 WL 712997

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 6, 1995

DocketNo. 95-1497

StatusPublished

This text of 664 So. 2d 49 (Serna v. Trujillo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Serna v. Trujillo, 664 So. 2d 49, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 12533, 1995 WL 712997 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff below, Jose Serna [Serna], appeals from an order denying his motion for prejudgment interest. We reverse.

Count I of the plaintiff’s complaint was for declaratory relief alleging that he entered into an agreement with the defendant, Jesus M. Trujillo [Trujillo], for the sale of Trujillo’s stock in Jemaros Investments, Inc. The trial court’s final judgment found that Trujillo “received $20,000 in June of 1991 towards the sale of his stock in Jemaros Investments, Inc., that was supplied by Jose Serna. The sale of the stock was not concluded and Jose Serna is entitled to a judgment for such money from Jesus M. Trujillo.”

Serna contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for prejudgment interest. We agree.

“[W]hen a verdict liquidates damages on a plaintiffs out-of-pocket, pecuniary losses, plaintiff is entitled, as a matter of law, to prejudgment interest at the statutory rate from the date of that loss.” Argonaut Ins. Co. v. May Plumbing Co., 474 So.2d 212, 215 (Fla.1985). In the instant case, Serna suffered a pecuniary loss from the date he paid Trujillo $20,000 for the sale of the stock. As such, as a matter of law, Serna is entitled to prejudgment interest from that date. See Leon v. West Collier Properties, Inc., 575 So.2d 1316, 1317 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Miller v. Reinhart, 548 So.2d 1174, 1175 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Chiado v. Rauch, 497 So.2d 945, 946 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).

[50]*50Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff below, Jose Serna [Serna], appeals from an order denying his motion for prejudgment interest. We reverse.

Count I of the plaintiff’s complaint was for declaratory relief alleging that he entered into an agreement with the defendant, Jesus M. Trujillo [Trujillo], for the sale of Trujillo’s stock in Jemaros Investments, Inc. The trial court’s final judgment found that Trujillo “received $20,000 in June of 1991 towards the sale of his stock in Jemaros Investments, Inc., that was supplied by Jose Serna. The sale of the stock was not concluded and Jose Serna is entitled to a judgment for such money from Jesus M. Trujillo.”

Serna contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for prejudgment interest. We agree.

“[W]hen a verdict liquidates damages on a plaintiffs out-of-pocket, pecuniary losses, plaintiff is entitled, as a matter of law, to prejudgment interest at the statutory rate from the date of that loss.” Argonaut Ins. Co. v. May Plumbing Co., 474 So.2d 212, 215 (Fla.1985). In the instant case, Serna suffered a pecuniary loss from the date he paid Trujillo $20,000 for the sale of the stock. As such, as a matter of law, Serna is entitled to prejudgment interest from that date. See Leon v. West Collier Properties, Inc., 575 So.2d 1316, 1317 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Miller v. Reinhart, 548 So.2d 1174, 1175 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Chiado v. Rauch, 497 So.2d 945, 946 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).

[50]*50Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

664 So. 2d 49, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 12533, 1995 WL 712997, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/serna-v-trujillo-fladistctapp-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack