Opinion ID: 439951
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Post-judgment interest on liquidated damages

Text: 143 In 1981 the district court held that the law of the case precluded it from awarding post-judgment interest on liquidated damages. In paragraph 19 of its 1974 order, the district court noted, it had not awarded post-judgment interest on pre-judgment interest. By analogy, it reasoned, that ruling is fully applicable to liquidated damages since liquidated damages are a substitute for pre-judgment interest (R. 119, at 2). We do not believe that law of the case settles this issue. Our evaluation of the merits leads us to conclude that plaintiffs are entitled to post-judgment interest on liquidated damages. Consequently, we reverse. 144 The district court did not award liquidated damages until 1980; it thus had no occasion to decide in 1974--and it did not decide in 1974--whether plaintiffs were entitled to post-judgment interest on liquidated damages. That question did not arise until 1981, following our Laffey I decision. Since the district court had not previously decided this question, it was free to rule thereon as it thought proper. Salvoni v. Pilson, 181 F.2d 615, 619 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 339 U.S. 981, 70 S.Ct. 1030, 94 L.Ed. 1385 (1950). 145 The district court's 1974 ruling refusing to award post-judgment interest on pre-judgment interest does not apply by analogy here, for liquidated damages are not merely a substitute for pre-judgment interest (R. 119, at 2). As defined by this court in Thompson v. Sawyer, 678 F.2d 257, 281 (1982), liquidated damages are compensatory, intended to reimburse workers for intangible losses--difficult to prove but nonetheless the very real consequences of unfair wages. Liquidated damages differ in amount and, to some extent, in kind from pre-judgment interest. Inasmuch as the law of the case did not control the question whether post-judgment interest should accrue on liquidated damages, that issue was and is open for determination on the merits. 146 The federal post-judgment interest statute, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1961 (1982), provides, in relevant part: 147 Interest shall be allowed on any money judgment in a civil case recovered in district court .... 148 This statute has been interpreted to mean that 149 once a judgment is obtained, interest thereon is mandatory without regard to the elements of which that judgment is composed. 150 Perkins v. Standard Oil Co., 487 F.2d 672, 675 (9th Cir.1973); see R.W.T. v. Dalton, 712 F.2d 1225 (8th Cir.1983). The law requires the awarding of post-judgment interest on all elements of the judgment, including liquidated damages. We therefore reverse the determination below and hold that plaintiffs are entitled to post-judgment interest on liquidated damages.