Court Opinion

ID: 9634352
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 13:09:14.221992+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:42:21.482586
License: Public Domain

LARSEN, Justice,
dissenting.
Rule 238 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure provides:
“(a) Except as provided in subdivision (e),1 in an action seeking monetary relief for bodily injury, death or property damage, or any combination thereof, the court ..., shall”
“(1) add to the amount of compensatory damages in the award of the arbitrators, in the verdict of a jury, or in *90the court’s decision in a nonjury trial, damages for delay at ten (10) percent per annum, not compounded, which shall become part of the award, verdict or decision;”
“(2) compute the damages for delay from the date the plaintiff filed the initial complaint in the action or from a date one year after the accrual of the cause of action, whichever is later, up to the date of the award, verdict or decision.”
“(c) Except as provided in subdivision (e), damages for delay shall be added to the award, verdict or decision against all defendants found liable, no matter when joined in the action.”
“(g) This rule shall not apply to
(1) eminent domain proceedings:
(2) pending actions in which damages for delay are allowable in the absence of this rule.”
This court has stated that the language of Rule 238 “clearly reflects a primary desire to encourage pre-trial settlement.” Laudenberger v. Port Authority of Allegheny County, 496 Pa. 52, 436 A.2d 147 (1981). In Laudenberger, we said:
“Undeniably, this rule serves to compensate the plaintiff for the inability to utilize funds rightfully due him, but the basic aim of the rule is to alleviate delay in the disposition of cases, thereby lessening congestion in the courts.”
“The rule undeniably imposes an additional duty upon defendants in the form of prejudgment interest. But what is the essence of this duty? Rule 238 provides compensation to a plaintiff for delay in receiving the monetary damages owing as a result of a defendant’s tort. This serves to indemnify the plaintiff for the money he would have earned on his award if he had promptly received it.”
Rule 127 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure sets forth Rules of Construction applicable in construing Rules of the Supreme Court:
*91“(a) The object of all interpretation and construction of rules is to ascertain and effectuate the intention of the Supreme Court.”
“(b) Every rule shall be construed, if possible, to give effect to all its provisions. When the words of a rule are clear and free from all ambiguity, the letter of it is not to be disregarded under the pretext of pursuing its spirit.”
“(c) When the words of a rule are not explicit, the intention of the Supreme Court may be ascertained by considering, among other matters (1) the occasion and necessity for the rule; (2) the circumstances under which it was promulgated; (3) the mischief to be remedied; (4) the object to be attained; (5) the prior practice, if any, including other rules and Acts of Assembly upon the same or similar subjects; (6) the consequences of a particular interpretation; (7) the contemporaneous history of the rule; and (8) the practice followed under the rule.”
In Laudenberger, this Court considered and discussed the occasion and necessity for Rule 238, the mischief to be remedied, and the object to be attained by its promulgation — to alleviate the mounting congestion and delay in concluding civil lawsuits for bodily injury, death or property damages in the trial courts, and to make the plaintiff whole by indemnifying him for the money he would have earned on his award if he would have received it promptly.
I find that the language of the Rule 238 construed within the directives of Rule 127 leads to the conclusion that delay damages are to be computed upon the entire award including any exemplary or punitive damages. The majority focuses upon the first seven words of Section (a)(1) of Rule 238, namely, “add to the amount of compensatory damages,” and interprets this phrase to mean that delay damages are to be computed only upon compensatory damages. A better construction of this phrase is that it means exactly what it says. Damages for delay, once computed upon the entire award (punitive damages are not excluded under Section (g) of the Rule) are to be added to the compensate*92ry damages. Nothing more is stated; nothing more is meant.
Rule 238 delay damages are damages awarded to make a plaintiff whole. Laudenberger v. Port Authority of Allegheny County, supra. See also: Marrazzo v. Scranton Nehi Bottling Co., 438 Pa. 72, 263 A.2d 336 (1970). The majority, citing the Restatement of Torts (Section), § 903 (1979), defined compensatory damages as “damages awarded to a person as compensation, indemnity or restitution for harm sustained by him.” In contemplation of Rule 238, the harm sustained by the plaintiff is the loss of the money he would have earned, on his award if it would have been paid to him promptly. Damages for delay are themselves compensatory damages designed to indemnify the plaintiff for that specific harm. They compensate the plaintiff for his loss occasioned by the delay in receiving the entire award, not a part of it.
I dissent.

. "(e) If a defendant at any time prior to trial makes a written offer of settlement in a specified sum with prompt cash payment lo the plaintiff, and continues that offer in effect until commencement of trial, but the offer is not accepted and the plaintiff does not recover by award, verdict or decision, exclusive of damages for delay, more than 125 percent of the offer, the court of the arbitrators shall not award damages for delay for the period after the date the offer was made.”
Rule 238(e), Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure.