Herrero v. Pearce, 571 So. 2d 96 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). · Go Syfert
Search
Herrero v. Pearce, 571 So. 2d 96 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
17 citation events (12 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: McLAUGHLIN, INC. v. RIC-MAN INTERNATIONAL, INC. (fladistctapp, 2010-04-07)
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) McLAUGHLIN, INC. v. RIC-MAN INTERNATIONAL, INC.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2010 · confidence medium
Herrero v. Pearce, 571 So.2d 96, 97 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (past due child support, prejudgment interest calculated from date when father should have made each payment); Metro.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Harris v. McKinney (2×)
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2009 · confidence medium
As part of those instructions, this court observed that "[t]he appellant correctly notes that the party entitled to an award of child support is also entitled to prejudgment interest computed from the dates the court determines the support payments to have been due." Id. at 981 (citing Herrero v. Pearce, 571 So.2d 96, 97 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Nova Southeastern University of Health Sciences, Inc. v. Sharick
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2009 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
Co. v. May Plumbing Co., 474 So.2d 212, 215 (Fla.1985) (finding that prejudgment interest is awardable based on a mathematical computation “[o]nce a verdict has liquidated the damages as of a date certain”); cf. Herrero v. Pearce, 571 So.2d 96, 97 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (where a monetary judgment was entered against a father requiring him to pay back child support, ordering that prejudgment interest be calculated at the statutory rate “from each monthly date of loss when [the father] should have made each payment”); Metro.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) NOVA SE UNIV. OF HEALTH SCI. v. Sharick
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2009 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
Co. v. May Plumbing Co., 474 So.2d 212, 215 (Fla.1985) (finding that prejudgment interest is awardable based on a mathematical computation "[o]nce a verdict has liquidated the damages as of a date certain"); cf. Herrero v. Pearce, 571 So.2d 96, 97 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (where a monetary judgment was entered against a father requiring him to pay back child support, ordering that prejudgment interest be calculated at the statutory rate "from each monthly date of loss when [the father] should have made each payment"); Metro.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Golden v. Lewis
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1994 · confidence medium
Herrero v. Pearce, 571 So.2d 96, 97 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).
cited Cited "see" Renee Marie Hollonbeck n/k/a Renee Marie Turley former wife v. Sean Andrew Hollonbeck, former husband
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2019 · signal: see · confidence high
See Herrero v. Pearce, 571 So. 2d 96, 97 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." R.A.C. v. P.J.S.
N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. · 2005 · signal: compare · confidence medium
Compare, Herrero v. Pearce, 571 So.2d 96, 97 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 1990) (in paternity action, party entitled to child support award is also entitled to prejudgment interest computed from date court determines each support payment to have been due) and Linard v. Hershey, 489 N.W.2d 599, 604-05 (S.D.1992) (allowing prejudgment interest where defendant frequently and sporadically did not pay his support obligation), with R.E.M. v. R.C.M., 804 S.W.2d 813, 814 (Mo.Ct.App.1991) (since amount due mother for child born out of wedlock was contingent on court’s determination under the UPA, claim was unli…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Rac v. Pjs
N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. · 2005 · signal: compare · confidence medium
Compare, Herrero v. Pearce, 571 So. 2d 96, 97 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1990) (in paternity action, party entitled to child support award is also entitled to prejudgment interest computed from date court determines each support payment to have been due) and Linard v. Hershey, 489 N.W. 2d 599, 604-05 (S.D. 1992) (allowing prejudgment interest where defendant frequently and sporadically did not pay his support obligation), with R.E.M. v. R.C.M., 804 S.W. 2d 813, 814 (Mo.Ct.App.1991) (since amount due mother for child born out of wedlock was contingent on court's determination under the UPA, claim was unl…
cited Cited "see, e.g." Phillips v. Parrish
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1991 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Herrero v. Pearce, 571 So.2d 96 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Ursula S. HERRERO, Appellant,
v.
William James PEARCE, Jr., Appellee.
89-1855.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Dec 14, 1990.
571 So. 2d 96
Per Curiam.
Cited by 11 opinions  |  Published

[*97] James G. Etheredge, Fort Walton Beach, for appellant.

William Henry Hunter, III, Destin, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Herrero appeals an order establishing Pearce as the father of her daughter but denying her request for pre-judgment interest and attorney's fees. Appellant contends that section 742.031, Florida Statutes (1987), mandates that a father must pay a prevailing plaintiff's attorney's fees and that, because her claim for back child support can be easily calculated, she is entitled to pre-judgment interest. We agree and reverse.

The prevailing complainant in a paternity action is entitled to attorney's fees under section 742.031, Florida Statutes (1987). White v. Means, 280 So.2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973). We reverse and remand for appropriate findings to support an award of attorney's fees to Herrero.

The trial court denied the request for pre-judgment interest because it considered the recovery unliquidated. Pre-judgment interest is merely another element of pecuniary damages. Mason v. Reiter, 564 So.2d 142, 145 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). Under the loss theory, the plaintiff is to be made whole from the date of the loss once a finder of fact has determined the amount of damages and the defendant's liability therefor. Id. For the purpose of assessing prejudgment interest, a claim becomes liquidated and susceptible of prejudgment interest when a verdict has the effect of fixing damages as of a prior date. Id. Once a verdict has liquidated the damages as of a date certain, computation of prejudgment interest is merely a mathematical computation. Id. at 146.

As in Mason, the final judgment in this case liquidated the child support payments due as of particular dates certain. These amounts were recognized by judgment and only a mathematical computation was left for the court to consider. Although no transcript was provided, it is undisputed on appeal that the court heard extensive argument which disclosed the specified amounts. Therefore, we remand the case for calculation and award of prejudgment interest at the statutory rate from each monthly date of loss when Pearce should have made each payment, see Argonaut Ins. Co. v. May Plumbing Co., 474 So.2d 212 (Fla. 1985); Zafrilla v. Volare Shoes Inc., 394 So.2d 146 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

ERVIN, WIGGINTON and MINER, JJ., concur.