 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Cohen v. Transcontinental Insurance Co.6/22/1999
OPINION OF THE COURT
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Kenneth Thompson, Jr., J.), entered June 29, 1998, which denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment seeking an order directing that defendant pay the amended judgment in the underlying action with costs, disbursements and interest from the date of the verdict, and granted defendant's cross-motion to modify and resettle the amended judgment, unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs, defendant's cross-motion denied, and plaintiff's motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.
Plaintiff brought a personal injury action against defendant's insured, Richard Simmons. Plaintiff was found 40% negligent and defendant 60% negligent. On March 12, 1996, a judgment was entered in the amount of $117,600, plus interest and disbursements, for a total of $123,934.40. Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal, hoping to increase the damage award. Subsequently, on May 24, 1996, defendant mailed plaintiff a check for $126,382.40. The accompanying letter stated that this sum represented the judgment plus interest until May 31, 1996, and requested a satisfaction of judgment in return. The letter went on to say that if plaintiff did not accept the check, defendant would apply for leave to deposit the payment with the court so as to halt the accrual of interest. In a letter dated May 31, plaintiff rejected the offer on the grounds that his appeal was pending.
Defendant then made an unopposed motion to deposit the funds into escrow with the court. The motion court denied it as academic, saying that defendant's tender of the check to plaintiff on May 24 was unconditional and therefore stopped the accrual of postjudgment interest pursuant to CPLR 5003.
On June 5, 1997, this court ordered a new trial on damages unless defendant would stipulate to increase the damages to $219,000 plus interest, costs and disbursements (Cohen v Simmons, 240 AD2d 191). Defendant so stipulated. However, on August 28, 1997, defendant sent plaintiff a check for $219,000, which bore the inscription "Full & Final Settlement of All Claims". Plaintiff refused to accept the check, because it did not include interest, costs and disbursements as required by this court's order. An amended judgment reflecting the increased award was entered on September 8, 1997.
In November 1997, plaintiff commenced the instant action seeking to compel defendant to pay the amended judgment. Plaintiff moved for summary judgment pursuant to Insurance Law ยง3420(a)(2). Defendant cross-moved for an order modifying and resettling the amended judgment to eliminate the obligation to pay postjudgment interest, on the grounds that defendant's unconditional tenders of payment in May 1996 and August 1997 had stopped the accrual of interest (Meiselman v Allstate Ins. Co., 197 AD2d 561). The IAS court denied plaintiff's motion and granted defendant's cross-motion to resettle the judgment accordingly. This was error.
Plaintiff correctly contends that neither offer of payment by defendant was unconditional and therefore was not a tender that would stop the accrual of interest (Rodriguez v Rodriguez, 93 AD2d 748, 749). The first offer, in May 1996, was conditioned on plaintiff's signing a satisfaction of judgment, which would have required plaintiff to abandon his pending appeal. A party may not appeal from a judgment after accepting its benefits and executing an unqualified accord and satisfaction (Mid-State Precast Sys. v Corbetta Constr. Co., 223 AD2d 776, 777). An offer of payment conditioned on a waiver of his right to appeal is not an unconditional tender (Pellegrino v State of New York, 133 Misc 2d 888, 891-92, affd 139 AD2d 502). Similarl
Page 1 2 New York Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE
|