Opinion ID: 767986
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Prejudgment Interest and Award of Attorney Fees

Text: 35 McMahan also asserts that it is entitled to prejudgment interest. Under Kentucky law, prejudgment interest follows a liquidated claim even if the refusal to pay is based upon good faith denial of liability. Hale v. Life Ins. Co. of North America, 795 F.2d 22, 24 (6th Cir. 1986).A claim is liquidated if the amount has been agreed to by the parties or is fixed by operation of law. See id. at 24. Here, McMahan's claim is liquidated since the amount of the judgment and each garnishment order was a fixed sum. Accordingly, McMahan is entitled to prejudgment interest.
36 Additionally, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 70, a party may be held in civil contempt for violating a garnishment order. The primary purpose of a civil contempt order is to compel obedience to a court order and compensate for injuries caused by non-compliance. TWM Manuf. Co. v. Dura Corp., 722 F.2d 1261 (6th Cir. 1983). We have previously recognized that an award of attorney's fees is appropriate for civil contempt in situations where court orders have been violated. See Redken Lab., Inc. v. Levin, 843 F.2d 226 (6th Cir. 1987). Here, an award of attorney's fees is warranted because McMahan was forced to expend a significant amount of money in attorney's fees to recover monies clearly owed to it; an undertaking that was made arduous solely through the conduct of Po Folks' and the Bank. 37 Furthermore, as the unsuccessful parties, the Bank and Po Folks are also responsible for the court appointed expert's fees and McMahan is entitled to reimbursement in the amount of $6,783.82.