Heath v. Palmer, 181 Vt. 545 (2006)

Citation: Heath v. Palmer, 181 Vt. 545 (2006)
Parent Document: Heath v. Palmer, 181 Vt. 545 (2006)
Jurisdiction: Vermont (state)
Effective Date: 2006-11-20
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/8345080/heath-v-palmer/ ↗

Full Text

993 chars

¶ 18. Finally, plaintiffs claim that the court erred in denying their request for prejudgment interest. We have held that an award of prejudgment interest is mandatory where damages are liquidated or readily ascertainable and otherwise discretionary where the court determines that it is necessary to make the plaintiff whole or avoid an injustice. Estate of Fleming v. Nicholson, 168 Vt. 495, 501, 724 A.2d 1026, 1030 (1998). Although plaintiffs here assert that they were unjustly deprived of the “full fruits” of the value they paid for their home, they have not shown that, in rejecting their request, “the court entirely withheld its discretion or that it exercised discretion for clearly untenable reasons or to a clearly untenable extent.” Remes v. Nordic Group, Inc., 169 Vt. 37, 39-40, 726 A.2d 77, 79 (1999) (quotations omitted) (rejecting claim that court abused its broad discretion in awarding prejudgment interest). Accordingly, we discern no basis to disturb the court’s ruling.

Other Sections in This Document (24)

Full Text