Opinion ID: 3032771
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Bad Faith Interest

Text: Section 8371 permits courts to “[a]ward interest on the amount of the claim from the date the claim was made by the insured in an amount equal to the prime rate of interest plus 3%.” 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8371(1). “If the correct legal standards are applied and the findings of fact are not clearly erroneous, the reasonableness of a fee award is reviewed only for abuse of discretion.” Polselli v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 126 F.3d 524, 533 n.11 (3d Cir. 1997). The District Court instructed the jury on a stipulation reached by the parties with regard to compensatory damages: “The financial losses include the portion of the $2.5 million verdict that exceeded Dr. Marcincin’s insurance coverage, together with delay damages and interest on that amount, for a total of $1,658,345.” The post-judgment interest from this stipulation amounted to $286,315.22. It was calculated at a rate of 6 percent simple interest, accruing from April 26, 2002, to October, 18, 2005, on the $1,372,030.04 excess verdict. The District Court found, because the parties stipulated to 34 an award of interest during trial, the Jurinkos waived their ability to recover statutory interest under § 8371(1). The Jurinkos contend they did not waive their right to interest equal to prime plus 3%. The Jurinkos point to the following exchange during the bad faith trial regarding the stipulation and post-judgment interest: Mr. Tanner [Jurinkos’ counsel]: And similarly, the statutory provision again under 8371 that reflects the amount of interest to be added to any award would also be something that the Court could calculate. And we would do that by way of post-trial motion, in the event we are successful. Mr. Lerman [Medical Protective’s counsel]: And our pretrial statement reflects that we agree to that also, Your Honor. The Court: Very well. But this statement can be read consistently with the stipulated compensatory damages and the additional interest the District Court awarded upon the Jurinkos’ post-trial motion to mold the verdict. The stipulated compensatory damages included an award of interest based on the amount of the excess verdict ($1.3 million) and delay damages ($72,030.04). The interest was calculated from April 26, 2002, the date of the excess verdict, to October 18, 2005, at a rate of six percent. In its order granting in part the Jurinkos’ motion to mold the verdict, the District Court awarded interest from October 19, 2005, through the date of the order, at a rate of prime plus three percent under § 8371(1). That the Jurinkos waived their right to additional interest is made clear by their calculation of interest. In order to award interest under § 8371, the Jurinkos ask us to award interest at prime plus three percent, then subtract any interest already recovered as 35 part of the compensatory award. The interest awarded in the compensatory award was intended to comprise all of the interest the Jurinkos were entitled to for the period of April 26, 2002, through October 18, 2005, with the Jurinkos free to move for additional interest based on the period following October 18, 2005. The District Court, in its discretion, awarded interest at prime plus three percent for the period from October 19, 2005, through the date of the order. We have explained that, in the context of § 8371, interest is awarded “to make the successful plaintiff completely whole.” Klinger v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 115 F.3d 230, 236 (3d Cir. 1997). By stipulation, the parties determined what amount would make Dr. Marcincin whole. The Jurinkos are therefore not entitled to additional interest beyond that already awarded.