Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Harold G. Seto and Rosemary Seto v. State Farm Insurance Company

October 16, 2012

HAROLD G. SETO AND ROSEMARY SETO, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: McVerry, J.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT

Presently before the Court for disposition are the following Motions:

(i) STATE FARM'S MOTION TO MARK THE JUDGMENT SATISFIED (Document No. 72) and RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO MARK JUDGMENT SATISFIED (Document No. 73); and

(ii) PLAINTIFF'S MOTION PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 60(b) FOR RELIEF FROM A JUDGMENT OR ORDER (Document No. 74) and STATE FARM'S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 60(b) FOR RELIEF FROM A JUDGMENT OR ORDER (Document No. 75).

The parties have fully stated their respective positions and the motions are ripe for disposition.

Background

On August 29, 2012, after a trial a jury returned a Verdict for Plaintiffs in this matter in the amount of $22,937.46. Plaintiffs did not make any request for pre-judgment interest on the verdict award.

On August 29, 2012, the Court entered Judgment on the Verdict Slip, in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendant in the amount of $22,937.46. The Judgment did not include an award of, or make reference to, pre-judgment interest.

On September 7, 2012, counsel for Plaintiffs informed counsel for Defendant that Plaintiffs would not file an appeal and requested a check in the amount of $26,126.02,*fn1 which represented the amount of the verdict plus interest at 6% per annum plus $92.0 0 for court costs.

On or about September 13, 2012, Defendant issued payment in the amount of the judgment ($22,937.46), and informed counsel for Plaintiffs that it would not pay interest or court costs. To date, the check has not been accepted / cashed by Plaintiffs as they contend that they are entitled to pre-judgment interest as well as recoupment of court costs.

Motion to Mark Judgment Satisfied

Defendant requests that the Court, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(5), mark the Judgment satisfied. That rule states:

(b) [T]he court may relieve a party or its legal representatives from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons:

(5) the judgment has been satisfied, released or discharged, it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or applying it ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.