Sidney v. Dutcher

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Sidney v. Dutcher

520 So. 2d 319, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 540, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 665, 1988 WL 13714

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 26, 1988·No. No. 87-1389·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the final judgment with one exception. The trial court erred in calculat[320] ing prejudgment interest at the rate of twelve percent per annum from April 19, 1982. That rate became effective July 1, 1982. See Trend Coin Co. v. Honeywell, Inc., 487 So.2d 1029, 1030 (Fla.1986). Upon remand the prejudgment interest should be recalculated to eliminate that error.

Affirmed and remanded for correction of the final judgment in the foregoing respect.

RYDER, A.C.J., and LEHAN and ■ FRANK, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the final judgment with one exception. The trial court erred in calculat[320] ing prejudgment interest at the rate of twelve percent per annum from April 19, 1982. That rate became effective July 1, 1982. See Trend Coin Co. v. Honeywell, Inc., 487 So.2d 1029, 1030 (Fla.1986). Upon remand the prejudgment interest should be recalculated to eliminate that error.

Affirmed and remanded for correction of the final judgment in the foregoing respect.

RYDER, A.C.J., and LEHAN and ■ FRANK, JJ., concur.

Sidney v. Dutcher, 520 So. 2d 319, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 540, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 665, 1988 WL 13714 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

520 So. 2d 319 (Sidney v. Dutcher) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related