Oldcastle Precast v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and Metra Industries

Background

Oldcastle sought payment for precast construction materials supplied to Metra for a construction project. Liberty was named as a defendant because it signed a payment bond guaranteeing payment for labor, materials, and services connected with the project. The parties’ contract required disputes to be resolved through arbitration.

The arbitrator issued an award on April 24, 2017. The opinion states that the award granted Oldcastle $290,253.13 in principal damages plus $21,283.83 in interest, for a total of $311,518.96. The court had previously confirmed the arbitration award and entered judgment on March 13, 2019.

Motion to Amend the Judgment

Oldcastle moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) to amend the judgment to include prejudgment interest. It alternatively invoked Rule 60. The court found the motion timely because it was filed less than 28 days after judgment was entered.

The court applied New York law to the breach-of-contract dispute. It explained that prejudgment interest is generally available as a statutory right in a contract action and is calculated at 9%. The court stated that, in this setting, prejudgment interest runs from the arbitration award until entry of final judgment. It also explained that federal law requires post-judgment interest on civil money judgments, including judgments confirming arbitration awards.

The defendants opposed the request for prejudgment interest but submitted no opposition to post-judgment interest. The court noted that awarding prejudgment interest from an earlier date would give Oldcastle more than it was entitled to because the arbitrator had already awarded interest through April 30, 2017.

Ruling

Judge Nelson S. Roman granted Oldcastle’s motion to amend the judgment to provide for New York prejudgment interest and federal post-judgment interest. The court directed the Clerk to amend the judgment entered in Oldcastle’s favor to include 9% prejudgment interest from May 1, 2017, through March 13, 2019, and post-judgment interest under federal law. The court also stated that the arbitrator’s $17,369.00 in compensation and expenses would be borne as incurred.

The opinion contains an apparent numerical inconsistency: its description of the arbitration award states principal damages of $290,253.13, while the conclusion describes the judgment as including $290,235.13. The conclusion also prints the start date for prejudgment interest as “May 1, 2017?”; the opinion’s text does not resolve that typographical uncertainty.