Patrick Wood v. LLC (2011)

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION RE MOTION FOR POSTJUDGMENT INTEREST (# 189.00) AND THE OBJECTION THERETO MOTION (# 191.00)

This case comes to this court as a motion for postjudgment interest.   The plaintiff cited Connecticut General Statutes § 37–3a as the basis for an order of postjudgment interest.   The court finds that the correct citation is Connecticut General Statutes § 37–3b.   The court does not accept the oral amendment made at the hearing.

In addition, the court finds that there is an automatic stay based on the appeal, and this motion should not be entertained at this time.

In addition, the court finds that even if it were entertained and the Section was correct, it would be half an order.   By that I mean, the computation has not been set forth in the motion as to the amount sought.   At some point a hearing would be necessary to determine what the amount of interest is.   The court finds it is a waste of the resources of the court to grant this motion without the amount.

In addition, Discover Bank v. Rudolph Mayer, AC 32031 sheds some doubt on whether or not 10% interest is automatic.   This needs to be addressed and briefed at any final hearing on this motion.

Accordingly, the Motion for Postjudgment Interest is denied without prejudice to having the issue presented once the appeal has been concluded, and the issues raised herein by the court have been addressed by brief and argument.

SO ORDERED.

EDWARD R. KARAZIN, JR.

JUDGE TRIAL REFEREE

Karazin, Edward R., J.T.R.