Motyka v. Detroit
| Decision Date | 31 October 1932 |
| Docket Number | No. 580.,580. |
| Citation | 260 Mich. 396,244 N.W. 897 |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
| Parties | MOTYKA v. DETROIT, G. H. & M. RY. CO. et al. MIECZNIK v. SAME. KULESZA v. SAME. |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to Circuit Court, Wayne County; Vincent M. Brennan, Judge.
Actions by Thomas Motyka, administrator, by Mary Miecznik, administratrix, and by Maryanna Kulesza, administratrix, against the Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Railway Company and another. Judgments for defendants, after verdicts in favor of plaintiffs were reversed (256 Mich. 417, 240 N. W. 29, which affirmed on rehearing the judgment in 253 Mich. 647, 235 N. W. 825). On motion for the allowance of interest upon the verdicts.
Order in accordance with opinion.
Argued before the Entire Bench.Arthur A. Koscinski and Robert J. Wojcinski, both of Detroit, for appellants.
Frederic T. Harward and Frederick V. Slocum, both of Detroit, for appellees.
In tort actions plaintiffs, upon trial by jury, had verdicts, but the court entered judgments non obstante veredicto for defendant. Upon review, we reversed the judgments (Motyka et al. v. Detroit, Grand Haven & Milwaukee Ry. Co., 256 Mich. 417, 240 N. W. 29), and ordered judgments in the circuit court to be entered on the verdicts.
Reconsideration of the allowance of interest upon the verdicts in moved. ‘At common law interest was as a rule not allowed on judgments.’ 15 R. C. L., p. 15.
Interest upon verdicts and judgments is purely statutory, and, being in derogation of the common law, cannot be extended beyond stated statutory regulation. Straus v. Elless Co., 245 Mich. 558, 222 N. W. 752. The statute, C. L. 1929, § 14555, awards interest upon judgments in tort actions ‘from the time of entry of the same.’ In actions founded on contracts, in certain specified instances, interest upon verdicts may be included in judgments. C. L. 1929, § 9238.
Entry of judgment means the ministerial act of the clerk in recording it in the permanent records of the court.
The circuit court is now directed to enter judgments on the verdicts, and, from the time of such entry, the interest will commence to run, and not before. No costs.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Matich v. Modern Research Corp.
...used was the product of negotiations among the parties.2 See Kermott v. Ayer, 11 Mich. 181, 184 (1863); Motyka v. Detroit, G.H. & M.R. Co., 260 Mich. 396, 398, 244 N.W. 897 (1932); Solakis v. Roberts, 395 Mich. 13, 21, 233 N.W.2d 1 (1975). See, generally, 45 Am Jur 2d, Interest and Usury, S......
-
Old Orchard by the Bay Associates v. Hamilton Mut. Ins. Co.
...decide whether the allowance of interest on verdicts and judgments in Michigan is "purely statutory," see Motyka v. Detroit, G H & M R Co., 260 Mich. 396, 398, 244 N.W. 897 (1932), or allowable even where no express statute could be invoked, Wilson v. Doehler-Jarvis Div. of Nat'l Lead Co., ......
-
Banoski v. Motor Crane Service, Inc.
...statute is remedial in nature and is in derogation of the common law, it must be strictly construed. Motyka v. Detroit, G.H. & M.R. Co. (1932), 260 Mich. 396, 244 N.W. 897; Swift v. Dodson (1967), 6 Mich.App. 480, 149 N.W.2d Since the judgment was entered in favor of plaintiff Alex Banoski,......
-
Department of Civil Rights v. Horizon Tube Fabricating, Inc.
...purely a creature of statute and if it is to be allowed at all, some statutory authority must authorize it. Motyka v. Detroit, G.J. & M.R. Co., 260 Mich. 396, 244 N.W. 897 (1932); Osinski v. DAIIE, 69 Mich.App. 426, 245 N.W.2d 76 (1976). M.C.L. Sec. 600.6013; M.S.A. Sec. 27A.6013 provides t......