Opinion ID: 1952771
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Whether the trial court erred in awarding prejudgment interest to the appellee?

Text: ¶ 20. Allstate next contends that the trial judge erred in allowing prejudgment interest because the amount of damages had not been liquidated. An award of prejudgment interest is normally left in the discretion of the trial judge. Warwick v. Matheney, 603 So.2d 330, 342 (Miss. 1992). No award of prejudgment interest may rationally be made or computed where the principal amount has not been fixed prior to judgment. Warwick, 603 So.2d at 342; Stanton & Associates, Inc. v. Bryant Const. Co., Inc., 464 So.2d 499, 504 (Miss. 1985). American Fire Protection, Inc. v. Lewis, 653 So.2d 1387, 1391 (Miss. 1995). ¶ 21. Allstate's argument that the amount of damages was in dispute and had not been liquidated is contradicted by the testimony of its own witness. Allstate agent, Bobby Pruitt, testified that the house and its contents were worth the amount for which they were insured. Pruitt also testified that the fire burned the house beyond repair. Thus it is undisputed that the house and its contents were a total loss. For this reason, Allstate's argument on this point is without merit. See also Simpson v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, 564 So.2d 1374, 1380-81 (Miss. 1990). The trial judge did not abuse his discretion in awarding prejudgment interest to Dorothy McGory. See also Miss. Code Ann. § 75-17-7 (allowing prejudgment interest).