Sawyer v. Walker
| Decision Date | 03 April 1990 |
| Parties | Priscilla M. SAWYER v. Oscar WALKER. |
| Court | Maine Supreme Court |
Leonard I. Sharon and Justin W. Leary, Robert A. Laskoff, P.A., Lewiston, for plaintiff.
Oscar Walker, Bangor, pro se.
Before McKUSICK, C.J., and GLASSMAN, CLIFFORD, HORNBY and COLLINS, JJ.
Plaintiff, Priscilla M. Sawyer, appeals the Superior Court's (Penobscot County, Browne, A.R.J.) order on costs arising from her successful civil action against defendant, Oscar Walker. Plaintiff contends that the Superior Court erred by refusing to allow her to recover any prejudgment interest to which she claims she is entitled under 14 M.R.S.A. § 1602(1) (Pamph.1989). We agree with plaintiff and modify the order accordingly.
On October 5, 1984, plaintiff filed a complaint in the Superior Court against defendant. On March 24, 1989, the jury awarded plaintiff $7,367 compensatory damages with interest. In her motion and bill for costs, plaintiff requested prejudgment interest "from the date the complaint was filed until the date the order of judgment is issued." The Superior Court denied plaintiff's request for any prejudgment interest on the ground that though plaintiff "stated for some periods during the pending of this action she could not be entitled to interest[,] ... [s]he ... requested interest for the full period without attempting to identify the amount to which she might have been entitled."
Plaintiff acknowledges that she is not entitled to prejudgment interest for the two periods of time which elapsed due to plaintiff's request for a continuance. Plaintiff should have specified the time periods for which she was entitled to interest in her motion and bill for costs. However, plaintiff argues that the Superior Court should have required her to present additional evidence of the amount of interest to which she was entitled rather than denying her claim altogether. Plaintiff is correct.
Section 1602 states in pertinent part that
[in] all civil actions, ... prejudgment interest shall be assessed ... [and] shall accrue from the time of notice of claim ... until the date on which an order of judgment is entered.
If the prevailing party at any time requests and obtains a continuance for a period in excess of 30 days, interest shall be suspended for the duration of the continuance. On petition of the nonprevailing party and on a showing of good cause, the trial court may order that interest awarded by this section shall be fully or partially waived.
14 M.R.S.A. § 1602(1) (Pamph.1989).
"[A] prevailing party has a right, although defeasible in some...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Crowe v. Bolduc
...(repealed and replaced by Me.Rev.Stat. Ann. tit. 14, § 1602-B, effective for judgments entered on or after July 1, 2003); Sawyer v. Walker, 572 A.2d 498, 499 (Me.1990). It is, therefore, beyond serious question that Crowe's success in Crowe II carried with it an entitlement to prejudgment i......
- Angelica v. Drummond, Woodsum & Macmahom, P.A.
-
Trask v. Automobile Ins. Co.
...and places the burden of proof on the nonprevailing party to show "good cause" for a waiver of that interest. See Sawyer v. Walker, 572 A.2d 498, 499-500 (Me.1990). [¶ 6] In the seminal Maine case on the issue of prejudgment interest in excess of insurance coverage, Nunez v. Nationwide Mutu......
- Mahar v. StoneWood Transport