Pursuant to an agreement between CIGA and the conservator for an injured worker, CIGA was paid a certain amount to settle its credit rights in a third party action.
After the worker died, his estate calculated that it had overpaid CIGA and petitioned the probate court for a reimbursement.
The court granted the petition and ordered CIGA "to refund $333,553.00 less 25% of sums CIGA incurred" for medical expenses it had paid on behalf of [the decedent] to the time of his death.
CIGA appealed the trial court's decision and lost.
CIGA did not pay the principal amount due under the trial court's order until over a year after losing its appeal, and not until first being served with an order for a debtor's examination.
It then paid $257,072.19, an amount agreed upon by the parties as representing the principal amount ordered by the court. The parties agreed the court would determine the issue of postjudgment interest.
The trial court heard petitioner's claim for postjudgment interest and ultimately denied it because there was "[n]o sum certain contained in [the] prior order."
In this unpublished decision the appellate court disagreed, ruling that the appropriate sum was easily determinable and that CIGA owed the postjudgment interest:
"Petitioner was entitled to interest under either Code of Civil Procedure section 685.020 or Civil Code section 3287. The judgment was sufficiently definite to be enforced and damages were capable of being made certain as of the date of the order...
"Under the California Constitution, interest attaches generally to judgments for an amount of money, regardless of the nature of the suit or the status of the judgment debtor. (Cal. Const., art. XV, § 1; Code Civ. Proc., § 685.010)"
The case is Conservatorship of Peterson.
To read the full opinion,
→
CLICK HERE.
