State Highway Commission v. Wunderlich
| Decision Date | 18 January 1943 |
| Docket Number | 35136. |
| Citation | 194 Miss. 119,11 So.2d 437 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION v. WUNDERLICH. |
Greek L. Rice, Atty. Gen., and Russell Wright, Asst. Atty. Gen and Green & Green and E. R. Holmes, Jr., all of Jackson for appellant.
Creekmore & Creekmore, of Jackson, for appellee.
Appellant suggests a re-examination of the question of liability of the State Highway Commission for the extra compensation allowed by the trial court and affirmed by us. 10 So.2d 453. It is argued that to allow a recovery of interest and costs against appellant as an instrumentality of the State is to ignore prior decisions including Josselyn v. Stone, 28 Miss. 753; Board of Supervisors of Warren County v Klein, 51 Miss. 807; Board of Supervisors of Clay County v. Board of Supervisors of Chickasaw County, 64 Miss. 534, 1 So. 753; Anderson v. Board of Sup'rs of Issaquena County, 75 Miss. 873, 23 So. 310; Moore v Tunica County, 143 Miss. 839, 108 So. 900; City of Natchez v. McGehee, 157 Miss. 225, 127 So. 902; State Highway Commission v. Mason, 192 Miss. 576, 4 So.2d 345, 6 So.2d 468; Boston Sand & Gravel Co. v. United States, 278 U.S. 41, 49 S.Ct. 52, 73 L.Ed. 170; and Shewan & Sons v. United States, 267 U.S. 86, 45 S.Ct. 238, 65 L.Ed. 527.
Interest may be of two kinds, that which is charged or contracted for as rental or compensation for the use of money, and that which is chargeable as additional recompense for detention of a debt. The former is usually provided for and fixed by contract or statute; the latter may be included as a factor in estimating the extent of damages in breach of contract. 33 C.J. 183; 30 Am.Jur.Interest, Sec. 8; 25 C.J.S., Damages, § 52, p. 537. It is not necessary for us, therefore, to respond to appellant's contention in view of the fact that the allowance designated in the report of the master and adopted by the trial court was added by way of additional damages so as to take into account the added loss incident to its detention and to preserve the adequacy of its compensation against depreciation by a continued denial of its use to appellee.
This court has always recognized the right in proper cases to allow interest, on claims for unliquidated damages, on the amount of damages established upon breach of contract. Foster & Co. v. Fulton Bag & Cotton Mills, 159 Miss. 217, 131 So. 415. See also Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. Haynes, 64 Miss. 604, 1 So. 765; Miller v. Robertson, 266 U.S. 243, 45 S.Ct. 73, 69 L.Ed. 265; Clarke Construction Co. v. United States, 7 Cir., 290 F. 192. Such allowances are not of interest eo nomine but as added compensation.
Such added compensation being a proper incident of damages in the case of contracts between individuals it becomes allowable likewise as against the appellant here. See former opinion 183 Miss. 428, 184 So. 456. Regardless of whether the State eo nomine is subject to suit or liable for interest as of course, the State Highway Commission has been established as a body corporate subject to suit (Code 1930, § 5006), and has in effect been capitalized by grant of extensive funds for the purpose of constructing and maintaining roads and highways throughout the State. These functions, together with its other multiple privileges and responsibilities,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Federal Sign v. Texas Southern University
...789, 494 N.E.2d 374, 377 (1986); Hersey Gravel Co. v. State, 305 Mich. 333, 9 N.W.2d 567, 569 (1943); State Highway Comm'n v. Wunderlich, 194 Miss. 119, 11 So.2d 437, 438 (1943); V.S. DiCarlo Constr. Co. v. State, 485 S.W.2d 52, 55 (Mo.1972); Meens v. State Bd. of Educ., 127 Mont. 515, 267 ......
-
Bankers Life and Cas. Co. v. Crenshaw
...interest. Mississippi Power & Light Co. v. Kusterer & Co., 156 Miss. 22, 34, 125 So. 429, 432 (1930); State Highway Commission v. Wunderlich, 194 Miss. 119, 122, 11 So.2d 437, 438 (1943). The economic value of an insurer's use of an insured's money, pending investigation and processing of a......
-
Warwick v. Matheney, 89-CA-0072
...allowing interest on unliquidated claims, based on those damages established upon a breach of contract. State Highway Commission v. Wunderlich, 194 Miss. 119, 11 So.2d 437, 438 (1943). When damages are not liquidated, "[s]uch allowances are not of interest eo nomine but as added compensatio......
-
Guaranty Trust Co. of N. Y. v. West Virginia Turnpike Commission
...201 Misc. 690, 110 N.Y.S.2d 770; C. & R. Construction Co. v. Commonwealth, 334 Mass. 232, 135 N.E.2d 539; State Highway Commission v. Wunderlich, 194 Miss. 119, 11 So.2d 437; National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers v. Parrish, 229 U.S. 494, 33 S.Ct. 944, 57 L.Ed. 1296; State ex rel. P......
-
CHAPTER 6 DIVISION ORDER ISSUES IN THE 1990s: STATE POLICING OF AN UNRESPONSIVE INDUSTRY
...on equitable principals due to wrongful detention of royalty in face of quiet title dispute); State Highway Comm'n. v. Wunderlich, 11 So.2d 437 (Miss. 1943); Dilworth v. Fortier, 405 P.2d 38 (Okla. 1964). [145] See Murdock v. Pure-Lively Energy 1981-A, Ltd., 775 P.2d 1292 (N.M. 1989) (inter......