FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2587199397> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2587199397 startingPage "789" @default.
• W2587199397 abstract "I. INTRODUCTIONIf were immediate, there would never be an award of prejudgment interest.1 In fact, if were immediate, then immediately upon the plaintiffs demand, the court would consider the plaintiff's proof of injury and would pronounce its judgment awarding or denying damages at that moment. Further, if were immediate, the defendant would immediately pay the judgment awarded, and there would be no issue of the use value of money. Unfortunately for injured plaintiffs, swift is rare in the American judicial system and, thus, the use value of money becomes important to most, if not all, money judgment awards.2 For this reason, Tennessee statutory provisions and judicial decisions have made interest available as an element of money damages for more than two centuries where justice requires it.3As a matter of right, prejudgment interest in Tennessee accrues on negotiable and nonnegotiable instruments and also on liquidated and settled accounts signed by the debtor.4 The narrow statutory authority upon which such interest as a matter of right stands limits these awards in a predictable and fair manner.5 Additionally, as a matter of discretion, courts have the authority to award, or decline to award, prejudgment interest according to equitable principles as they existed on April l, 1979.6 Unfortunately, those equitable principles authorizing discretionary awards of interest remain largely undefined. As a result, discretionary awards of prejudgment interest can be, at times, neither predictable nor fair. In fact, in light of the state of Tennessee jurisprudence on this issue, with sufficient time and unlimited research resources, a party could most likely find precedent to support either the award, or the denial, of prejudgment interest in most any type of claim.For instance, Tennessee Supreme Court decisions simultaneously provide authority supporting the position that certainty of the amount of damages is both dispositive and nondispositive on the issue of prejudgment interest.7 Specifically, precedent supports the argument that equitable principles do not allow prejudgment interest on personal injury not resulting in death. In such claims, the dispute both as to existence of the obligation and the amount of the obligation conclusively renders such an award inequitable. At the same time, where a party alleges the breach of an insurance contract and bad faith failure to pay in which both the existence and the amount of the obligation are reasonably disputed, precedent supports the argument that equitable principles allow the award of prejudgment interest.9 On the one hand, uncertainty as to either existence or amount of an obligation arising from personal injury is dispositive of the issue of prejudgment interest. On the other hand, uncertainty as to either existence or amount of an obligation arising from a breach of contract and bad faith failure to pay is but one of many discretionary and nondispositive facts for a court to consider as it determines whether the award of prejudgment interest is equitable.Furthermore, Tennessee's lower courts have exhibited the same schizophrenic tendencies in other types of claims as well. At the same time that some courts have clearly stated that a prejudgment interest award on damages in a wrongful death action would be an abuse of discretion, other courts have indicated that such an award would indeed be within the court's discretion.10 Likewise, contradictory authority exists, as well, where the claim is related to an employment contract11 and to a settlement agreement.12In addition, case law indicates that the underlying theory for prejudgment interest in Tennessee is to compensate plaintiffs for damages arising out of the lost use of funds to which they were legally entitled between the time of injury and judgment. This rationale could lead a reasonable person to the seemingly logical conclusion that prejudgment interest would be permitted for all of a plaintiff's actually incurred economic losses or damages occasioned by a defendant's conduct. …" @default.
• W2587199397 created "2017-02-17" @default.
• W2587199397 creator A5044240815 @default.
• W2587199397 date "2004-07-01" @default.
• W2587199397 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W2587199397 title "Prejudgment Interest in Tennessee: It's a Fine Mess We're in! Proposed Statutory Solutions to the Inequitable Application of an Equitable Remedy" @default.
• W2587199397 hasPublicationYear "2004" @default.
• W2587199397 type Work @default.
• W2587199397 sameAs 2587199397 @default.
• W2587199397 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2587199397 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2587199397 hasAuthorship W2587199397A5044240815 @default.
• W2587199397 hasConcept C139621336 @default.
• W2587199397 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W2587199397 hasConcept C158129432 @default.
• W2587199397 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2587199397 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2587199397 hasConcept C2777381055 @default.
• W2587199397 hasConcept C2777632292 @default.
• W2587199397 hasConcept C2778893106 @default.
• W2587199397 hasConcept C97460637 @default.
• W2587199397 hasConceptScore W2587199397C139621336 @default.
• W2587199397 hasConceptScore W2587199397C144133560 @default.
• W2587199397 hasConceptScore W2587199397C158129432 @default.
• W2587199397 hasConceptScore W2587199397C17744445 @default.
• W2587199397 hasConceptScore W2587199397C199539241 @default.
• W2587199397 hasConceptScore W2587199397C2777381055 @default.
• W2587199397 hasConceptScore W2587199397C2777632292 @default.
• W2587199397 hasConceptScore W2587199397C2778893106 @default.
• W2587199397 hasConceptScore W2587199397C97460637 @default.
• W2587199397 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W2587199397 hasLocation W25871993971 @default.
• W2587199397 hasOpenAccess W2587199397 @default.
• W2587199397 hasPrimaryLocation W25871993971 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W1488240501 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W1498711809 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W1507667598 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W1524668316 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W1842538394 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W1994035281 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W2228643466 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W227076592 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W2272844849 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W2331364132 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W2506673701 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W282373461 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W3122078062 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W3124137948 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W334153841 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W349391258 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W627377865 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W67357406 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W2598710846 @default.
• W2587199397 hasRelatedWork W3124064185 @default.
• W2587199397 hasVolume "34" @default.
• W2587199397 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2587199397 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2587199397 magId "2587199397" @default.
• W2587199397 workType "article" @default.