Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Howard URBAN, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. B.R. GUEST, INC., also known as B.R. Guest, Ltd., and Rich Products Corporation, Defendants–Respondents. (Appeal No. 3.)
Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for, inter alia, breach of an agreement pursuant to which he leased property to defendant B.R. Guest, Inc., also known as B.R. Guest, Ltd. Supreme Court conducted a nonjury trial and awarded plaintiff a sum for unpaid school taxes, missing inventory, and damage to the property. We agree with plaintiff that the court erred in awarding preverdict interest at the rate of 4% per annum, rather than 9% per annum, and we therefore modify the judgment accordingly. “Interest shall be recovered upon a sum awarded because of a breach of performance of a contract, or because of an act or omission depriving or otherwise interfering with title to, or possession or enjoyment of, property” (CPLR 5001[a] ), and the statutory rate of interest is 9% per annum (see CPLR 5004). Contrary to defendants' contention, the damages awarded here were not equitable in nature, and the court therefore did not have discretion to impose a different rate of interest (see CPLR 5001[a]; Davenport v. Martin, 4 A.D.3d 873, 771 N.Y.S.2d 460; Zimmerman v. Tarshis, 300 A.D.2d 477, 751 N.Y.S.2d 418; see generally Action S.A. v. Marc Rich & Co., 951 F.2d 504, 508–509, cert. denied 503 U.S. 1006, 112 S.Ct. 1763, 118 L.Ed.2d 425).
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously modified on the law by providing that preverdict interest shall be at the rate of 9% per annum and as modified the judgment is affirmed without costs.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: 1381, 06-01792
Decided: November 09, 2007
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)