Attard Industries, Inc. v. United States Fire Insurance Company, No. 1:2010cv00121 - Document 182 (E.D. Va. 2010)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION re: 168 Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law and (2) Motion for a New Trial and (3) Motion to Alter or Amend the Judgment. (see Order for details) Signed by District Judge Anthony J Trenga on 11/9/10. (tfitz, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Attard Industries, Inc. v. United States Fire Insurance Company Doc. 182 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division ATTARD INDUSTRIES, INC., Plaintiff, No. I:10cvl21 (AJT/TRJ) v. UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE CO. Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION On August 27, 2010, following a four day trial, a jury returned a verdict in favor of Plaintiff Attard Industries, Inc. ("Attard") against Defendant United States Fire Insurance Co. ("USFIC") in the amount of $1,872,430 plus prejudgment interest running from January 18,2007. Judgment in that amount was entered on September 15,2010 (Doc. No. 163). In response, USFIC filed a (1) Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law; (2) Motion for a New Trial; and (3) Motion to Alter or Amend the Judgment (Doc. No. 168), in which it challenges the legal sufficiency of the verdict and the date from which the jury awarded prejudgment interest. For the reasons discussed below, the Court concludes that as a matterof law prejudgment interest against a surety, such as USFIC, cannot accrue before a beneficiary, such as Attard, makes its first demand for payment under a surety bond, which occurred in this case on October 20, 2009. The Court will accordingly amend the judgment entered on the verdict but otherwise denies USFIC's motions. Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
