United States v. Weimer, C 13–3035–001–MWB.

• Decision Date: 25 November 2014
• Docket Number: No. C 13–3035–001–MWB.,C 13–3035–001–MWB.
• Citation: 63 F.Supp.3d 922
• Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Shirley WEIMER, Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa

63 F.Supp.3d 922

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff
v.
Shirley WEIMER, Defendant.

No. C 13–3035–001–MWB.

United States District Court, N.D. Iowa, Central Division.

Signed Nov. 25, 2014.

63 F.Supp.3d 924

Forde Fairchild, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Sioux City, IA, for Plaintiff.

Michael J. Lehan, Omaha, NE, for Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING INTEREST ON RESTITUTION ORDER

MARK W. BENNETT, District Judge.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I.	INTRODUCTION	925
II.	BACKGROUND	926

A.	Facts	926
B.	Procedure and Restitution Claims	927

III. DISCUSSION 927

A.	Statutory Authority to Order Restitution	927
B.	Standard for Determining Whether Restitution is Owed	931

1.	Is State Farm a Victim?	931
2.	What is the Full Amount of State Farm's Loss?	932

C. Imposition of Pre– and Postjudgment Interest 934

1.	Pre- and Postjudgment Interest under the VWPA	935
2.	Pre– and Postjudgment Interest under the MVRA	936
3.	Analysis	939

D. Calculating the Appropriate Interest Award 939

1.	The Amount Subject to the Award of Interest	939
2.	Date From Which to Calculate Interest	939
3.	The Rate At Which To Calculate Interest	940

E. Payment Schedule 941

IV. CONCLUSION 942

63 F.Supp.3d 925

I. INTRODUCTION

Like a good neighbor, State Farm was there for the defendant,¹ Shirley Weimer (Weimer), in March of 2009. After Weimer filed an insurance claim for a fire that burned down her rental property, “the good neighbor,” State Farm, distributed $78,593.25 to Weimer for the fire-related losses. Unbeknownst to State Farm at that time, Weimer, the “bad neighbor,” had spearheaded a criminal arson conspiracy to burn down the rental property and defraud her “good neighbor” of the insurance proceeds.

On April 1, 2014, Weimer pleaded guilty to Count 1 of her Indictment, Conspiracy to Use Fire to Commit Wire Fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1343, pursuant to a binding plea agreement. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(c)(1)(C). Per this plea agreement Weimer was sentenced on November 25, 2014, to 120 months imprisonment and “complete restitution.”² Because the parties did not address what the term “complete restitution” means—I do. The question I address is whether one of the Nation's largest insurance companies, “the good neighbor,” is entitled to pre- and postjudgment interest on restitution from Weimer, “the bad neighbor”?³ More precisely, are both pre- and postjudgment interest on restitution under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (MVRA), 18 U.S.C. §§ 3663A –3664, allowable when the MVRA is silent on this question?

Further complicating the above questions is the fact that the parties' Rule 11(c)(1)(C) binding plea agreement, which I accepted, does not specifically address the issue of whether to include interest on the restitution. Rather, her plea agreement provides for “full restitution,” and “[c]omplete restitution shall be due and payable at or before the time of sentencing.” In addition, citing to 18 U.S.C. § 3663A, Weimer's PSIR indicates that restitution is “mandatory” and provides an “Amount of Loss” of $78,593.25, but the PSIR does not include an interest calculation.

Below, I initially discuss the undisputed facts from the record, following which I summarize the legal proceedings that...