 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
American Samoa Government v. Factory Mutual Insurance Co.11/19/2002
fendant subsequently agreed to settle by paying a lesser amount to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs accepted the settlement but refused to enter a satisfaction of judgment because they wanted postjudgment interest. The trial court then ordered the defendant to pay postjudgment interest from the judgment on the jury verdict. On appeal from that order, the court held that the original jury verdict was reinstated and the judgment was only modified, not reversed. Therefore, according to the rules enunciated in Stockton, plaintiffs were entitled to interest from the entry of the original judgment on the jury's verdict. (Id. at p. 210.)
The result here is dictated by a simple progression of reasoning: if the trial court had entertained and granted the alter ego motion when it had originally been brought, and we had affirmed the finding on appeal, interest on punitive damages would have run from date of the original judgment; we specifically stated in our opinion that if, "upon remand, the trial court does find that Allendale was the alter ego of Affiliated, then the punitive damage award may be reinstated " (Slip opn. at p. 47, italics added); upon remand, the parties stipulated that Allendale (Factory Mutual) was the alter ego of Affiliated F.M.; the judgment was amended and it relates back to the original judgment. Except for the fact of the stipulation and that we are dealing with an amendment, that is essentially the outcome of Stockton Theatres, supra, 55 Cal.2d 439, Snapp v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., supra, 60 Cal.2d 816, Espinosa v. Rossini, supra, 257 Cal.App.2d 567 and Ehret v. Congoleum Corp., supra, 87 Cal.App.4th 202.
Also, given the equitable nature of the remedy and that the parties stipulated to the fact of alter ego, the court acted well within its discretion in concluding that equity required that interest relate back to the date of the original judgment.
DISPOSITION
The judgment (trial court's order allowing postjudgment interest from Sept. 28, 1995) is affirmed. Respondent ASG shall recover costs on appeal.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
We concur:
VOGEL (C.S.), P.J.
CURRY, J.
|