WPC  tTmRQC0qz2 ^u]/MguUF.tUF3UF!gUF~ BoUFU: D3 0D.................................................................................. AOr 0D D/ BHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nL(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($<4 9Z .Courier New Regular E  E  D  D e D Ӏw#%3|x &@FZ 8CaslonOpnface BT Regular   $    1     X/XXX TX X/TheStateinitiallyappealedthatjudgment;however,itsubsequently P  dismisseditsappeal,andpaidthejudgmenttotheclaimantsonFebruary15,1998.Hence,theStatesliability,andtheamountofdamagesawardedbytheCommissioner,arenotatissueonthisappeal.((3$ !      0  (#$  0  <4 9Z .Courier New Regular   $    3    XNXXXXXNThegeneralstatutoryprovisionsregardingprejudgmentinterestareset P  forthatT.C.A.4714123.Thatsectionprovides,inpertinentpart,asfollows:  8 ` Prejudgmentinterest,i.e.,interestasanelementof,orinthenatureof,damages,aspermittedbythestatutoryandcommonlawsofthestateasofApril1,1979,maybeawardedbycourtsorjuriesinaccordancewiththeprinciplesofequityatanyratenotinexcessofamaximumeffectiverateoftenpercent(10%)perannum;....<4 9Z .Courier New Regular   $    1    XNXXXX XNTheStateinitiallyappealedthatjudgment;however,itsubsequently P  dismisseditsappeal,andpaidthejudgmenttotheclaimantsonFebruary15,1998.Hence,theStatesliability,andtheamountofdamagesawardedbytheCommissioner,arenotatissueonthisappeal.<4 9Z .Courier New Regular  $    2    X/XXXTXX/Noissuesconcerningtheawardofpostjudgmentinterestareraisedon P  thisappeal.<4 9Z .Courier New Regular   $    5    XNXXXXXNTheamountofthejudgmentwas$75,000.Therefore,prejudgment P  interest,calculatedat10%perannum,seeT.C.A.4714123,foraperiodof   twoyearsis$15,000,andforanadditionaltwomonthsis$1,250,foratotalof$16,250.<4 9Z .Courier New Regular   $    4    XNXXXXXNWhenthelastproposedfindingsoffactwerefiled,thismatterhad P  alreadybeenunderadvisementforoversevenmonths.<Q 9Z .Courier New Regular    )  $    4    XNXXXXXNWhenthelastproposedfindingsoffactwerefiled,thismatterhad P  alreadybeenpendingbeforetheCommissionerforjudgmentforoversevenmonths.<Q 9Z .Courier New Regular   $    4    XNXXXXXNWhenthelastproposedfindingsoffactwerefiled,thismatterhad P  alreadybeenunderadvisementforoversevenmonths.<Q 9Z .Courier New Regular   $    5     XNXXX XXNTheamountofthejudgmentwas$75,000.Therefore,prejudgment P  interest,calculatedat10%perannum,seeT.C.A.4714123,foraperiodof   twoyearsis$15,000,andforanadditionaltwomonthsis$1,250,foratotalof$16,250. d<4 9Z .Courier New Regular "XU@XXX"1X"XU@ Ad   FILED"} "1   December17,1998  CecilCrowson,Jr.AppellateCourtClerk ,cAZ"Arial Regular'dxd(3$ !  -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd !     P X/XXX7LXXdd7TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T  P  @| | INTHECOURTOF  APPEALSOFTENNESSEE   P   l!*6&"h 8 `E tt06H lߛ HH(#(# @ |ATKNOXVILLECARLLAWSON,Administratorof  )C/ANO.03A01 T 9806BC00185theEstateofJEFFREYLYNN)LAWSON,andBESSIEandCARL  )   LAWSON,asnextofkinto  ) \   (#(#HHJEFFREYLYNNLAWSON, h   ) 2     `     h   )  ClaimantsAppellants,  ) .     `     h   )APPEALASOFRIGHTFROMTHE   `     h   )TENNESSEECLAIMSCOMMISSION,v.   `     h   )EASTERNDIVISION `     `     h   )   `     h   )   `     h   )   `     h   )STATEOFTENNESSEE,   h   )     `     h   )HONORABLEMICHAELS.LACY,  DefendantAppellee. h   )COMMISSIONER : ForAppellants    h     ForAppellee   THOMASRICHARDSPRADLIN h     JOHNKNOXWALKUP "> Morristown,Tennessee h     AttorneyGeneralandReporter d#    `     h     Nashville,TennesseeDENISETERRYSTAPLETONTerry,Terry&Stapleton h     ARTHURCROWNOVERII %! Morristown,Tennessee h     AssistantAttorneyGeneral &l"    `     h     Nashville,Tennessee@$ XXXX/  r& X XOPINION# XX  r& ##X/XX X酹 #Ԉ p2 (0  ^:09 P    REVERSEDANDREMANDED h      p      x Susano,J. ^:09 P       ` Thisappealinvolvesaclaimforposttrial,prejudgmentinterest.ItarisesoutofanactionfordamagesbroughtbyBessieandCarlLawson( theclaimants)forthewrongfuldeathoftheirson,JeffreyLynn  Lawson( Mr.Lawson).  After  Mr.  Lawson,aninmate  at  theSoutheasternTennesseeStateRegionalCorrectionalFacilityinPikeville,Tennessee,wasmurderedbyanotherinmate,theclaimantsfiledthisaction  againsttheStateofTennesseewith  theTennesseeClaims  Commission.  Thematterwastriedbefore the  ClaimsCommissionerMichaelS.Lacy( Commissioner)   on  June29and30,1994.Somethreeyearslater,onJuly28,1997,theCommissionerenteredjudgmentinfavoroftheclaimants  for  $75,000,findingthattheStatehadbeennegligentinthecare,custodyandcontrolof  Mr.  Lawson.       #  1             ` Followingentryofthejudgment,theclaimantsfiledamotionseekingpostjudgmentandprejudgmentinterest.TheCommissionerthenenteredanorderawardingtheclaimantspostjudgmentinterestintheamountof$4,233.30P  #  2      ;however,he h($ declinedtogranttheclaimantsprejudgmentinterest,findingthatsuchanawardwouldbe inappropriate.TheclaimantsappealedfromtheCommissioners  judgment,  raisingthefollowingissueforourconsideration:  8 `  Does  theCommissionersrefusaltoawardposttrialprejudgmentinterestamount,undertheparticularcircumstancesinvolved,toamanifest F3(1 andpalpableabuseofdiscretiononhispart,justifyingreversalon  appeal? ` `     @tt)  I.     ` Citingthethreeyeardelaybetweenthe  hearingand  theentryoftheCommissioners  judgment,  theclaimantscontendthatequitableconsiderationsjustifyanawardofprejudgmentinterestinthis  case;buttheydonotseeksuchinterest  forthe  periodoftime  betweentheirsonsdeathonOctober9,1989,andthe  hearing  onJune2930,1994.  Rather,theyfocusontheperiodoftimefollowingthehearingandinsist  thattheCommissionersfailuretoresolvetheircaseinatimelymannerunfairlydilutedtheirawardandunjustlyenrichedthe  State.Theclaimantsarguethattheyareentitledto  prejudgmentinterestof$25,200fortheperiodfromJune30,  1994,thelastdayofthehearing,toJuly   28,   1997,thedateofentryoftheCommissionersjudgment.     ` TheState,ontheotherhand,arguesthattheCommissionerlackedjurisdictiontoawardprejudgmentinterestinatortclaim.Itbasesthisassertiononthefactthattherelevantstatute,T.C.A.98307(d),doesnot  specificallyauthorizeanawardofprejudgment   interest,and,infact,specifically   refers  toanothercodesectionthatpertainsonlytopostjudgmentinterest.  T.C.A.  98307(d)provides,in <1&/ pertinentpart,asfollows:  8 ` Iftheclaimantissuccessful...,thestateshallpaysuchinterestasthecommissionermaydeterminetobeproper,notexceedingthelegalrateasprovidedin4714121.... ` `   9L/9 T.C.A.98307(d).T.C.A.  4714121states    thatinterestonjudgmentsshallbecalculatedattherateof10%perannum.The  P Statepointsoutthatthis  latterstatute    addressesonly  postjudgment  interest;therefore,sotheargumentgoes,T.C.A.98307(d)doesnotauthorizea  claimscommissioner     to    award  prejudgment  interest.  #  3      ׀TheStatefurtherarguesthat X    Commissioner   Lacydid     nothave    contrarytotheclaimants  assertion     equitable    jurisdictiontoawardsuchinterest.Finally,inthealternative,theStatecontendsthateveniftheCommissionerdidhavejurisdictiontoawardprejudgmentinterest,hedidnotabusehisdiscretionindecliningtodosointhiscase.Inthisconnection,theStatearguesthatprejudgmentinterestisnot  allowable    asamatterofrightincasesinvolvingunliquidateddamagesintort,andthattheCommissionersdenialofprejudgmentinterestdidnotconstituteanabuseofdiscretion.@88)  II.       `  TheSupremeCourthasrecentlyaddressedthesubjectofprejudgmentinterest:      8 ` Anawardofprejudgmentinterestiswithinthesounddiscretionofthetrialcourtandthe T1'/ decisionwillnotbedisturbedbyanappellatecourtunlesstherecordrevealsamanifestandpalpableabuseofdiscretion. Spencerv.A1   CraneService,Inc. ,880S.W.2d938,944(Tenn.   1994); Otisv.CambridgeMut.FireIns.Co. ,850  p S.W.2d439,446(Tenn.1992)....Generallystated,theabuseofdiscretionstandarddoesnotauthorizeanappellatecourttomerelysubstituteitsjudgmentforthatofthetrialcourt. ` `   Myintv.AllstateIns.Co. ,970S.W.2d920,927(Tenn.1998); p   Alexanderv.Inman ,974S.W.2d689,698(Tenn.1998).  A    trial 8  courtsor  commissioners    񀄄discretion,however,isnotabsolute. Wilderv.TennesseeFarmersMut.Ins.Co. ,912S.W.2d X 722,727(Tenn.App.1995).   ` TheSupremeCourthasstated  that      8 ` [s]everalprinciplesguidetrialcourtsinexercisingtheirdiscretiontoawardordenyprejudgmentinterest.Foremostaretheprinciplesofequity.Tenn.CodeAnn.4714123.Simplystated,thecourtmustdecidewhethertheawardofprejudgmentinterestisfair,giventheparticularcircumstancesofthecase. ` `   Myint ,970S.W.2dat927.TheSupremeCourtin Myint alsonoted X* &   two  otherconsiderations  thatfactor    intoatrialcourtsdecision. Id. Thefirstconcept providesthatprejudgment -x#* interestisallowedwhentheamountoftheobligationiscertain,orcanbeascertainedbyaproperaccounting,andtheamountisnotdisputedonreasonablegrounds;thesecondconcept  is    that interestisallowedwhentheexistenceoftheobligationitselfisnotdisputedonreasonablegrounds. Id. (citing Mitchellv. 06+4 Mitchell ,876S.W.2d830,832(Tenn.1994)).TheCourtfurther 7-6 explainedthatthecertaintyoftheexistenceoramountofan 9p/8 obligationwillbolsteraclaimforprejudgmentinterest;however,theabsenceofsuchcertaintyclearlydoesnot  necessarilyrequire    thatprejudgmentinterestbedenied. Myint ,  P 970S.W.2dat928.Inotherwords,  8 ` [t]hecertaintyoftheplaintiffsclaimisbutoneofmanynondispositivefactstoconsiderwhendecidingwhetherprejudgmentinterestis,asamatteroflaw,equitableunderthecircumstances. ` `   Id.  T @(  III.        ` WefirstturntothequestionofwhethertheCommissionerhadjurisdictiontoawardprejudgmentinterestinacasesuchasthis.WecannotagreewiththeStatethatsuchanawardisbeyondthejurisdictionofaclaimscommissioner.Asnotedabove,therelevantcodeprovision,foundatT.C.A.98307(d),providesthatintheeventaclaimantissuccessful,theState shallpaysuchinterestasthecommissionermaydeterminetobeproper....Itistruethatnospecificmentionofprejudgmentinterestismadeintherelevantprovisions;bythesametoken,however,T.C.A.98307(d)doesnotdistinguishbetweenprejudgmentandpostjudgmentinterest,nordoesitexpresslyprohibitanawardoftheformer.Webelievethatthisprovision,strictlyconstrued,isbroadenoughtoauthorizethegrantingofprejudgmentinterestinthediscretionoftheCommissioner.Furthermore,wedisagreewiththeStatesassertionthatthestatutesreferencetoT.C.A.4714121meansthatanawardofprejudgmentinterestisnotauthorized. 9/9 Onthecontrary,thereferencetoT.C.A.4714121appearstohavebeenincludedforthesolepurposeofprovidingaceilingontherateofinterestthatacommissionermayaward.   ` WethereforeholdthatCommissionerLacydidhavejurisdictiontoawardprejudgmentinteresttotheclaimants.Havingsodetermined,wenowturntothequestionofwhetherhisrefusaltomakesuchanawardinthiscaseconstitutesa manifestandpalpableabuseofdiscretion.   Myint   ,970S.W.2d @  at927.     `  Wefirstnotethatthe    instantcasediffersfromthetypicalprejudgmentinterest  case.Intheinstantcase,theclaimants     donotrequest    interestfor  the    periodoftimepriortothe  hearing.    Inmostcasesinvolvingaclaimforprejudgmentinterest,therelevanttimeframeispretrial,betweenthe  dateoftheevent    givingrisetothelitigationandthe  dateoftheentry    ofthejudgment.  Here,    however,  theclaimantsask    ustodeterminewhether,consideringtheinordinateamountoftimethatpassedbetweenthe  hearing    andtheentryofthejudgment,  they    areentitledtoprejudgmentinterestforallorpartofthat  period.  Underthecircumstancesofthiscase,webelievethatthe  answertothatquestion    isyes.   ` Overthreeyearselapsedbetweenthecompletionofthe  hearing  andtheentryoftheCommissionersjudgment.However,therecordindicatesthatatthecloseofthe  hearing,    theCommissionerandtheattorneysforbothsidesanticipated  thatthepartieswouldfileproposed    findingsoffact.Itappears 8.8 thattheStatefileditsproposedfindingsonAugust22,1994,butthattheclaimantsdidnotsubmittheirproposedfindingsuntilapproximatelyFebruary9,1995.     Although    theclaimantsfileda MotionforRulingalmosttwoyearslater,inDecember,1996,theCommissionersjudgment  was    notfileduntilJuly28,1997.Atthatpoint,overthreeyearshadpassedsincethecompletionofthe  hearing,    orapproximatelytwoyearsandfivemonthssincetheclaimantssubmissionoftheirproposedfindingsoffact.   ` Inourestimation,threeyears  is    an  unreasonableperiodof    timeforasingletrieroffacttodecide  a    negligence  caseinvolving    arelativelystraightforwardclaimthattheStatehadbeennegligentinreturning     feudinginmates    tothegeneralprison  populationatthesametime.    AsidefromtheissueoftheStatesliability,theonlyrealquestionsatissueinvolvedcalculationofthepecuniaryvalueof  Mr.    Lawsons  life,     his    painandsuffering,andthe  other    expenses  normallyassociated    withawrongfuldeathaction.TheCommissioners11pageopiniondoesnotindicatethatextensivelegalresearchwasrequiredtoreachhisdecision;norcanwefindintherecordanyotherapparentjustificationforthedelay.   ` Underthecircumstancesofthiscase,it  wouldbe    unfairtodeprivetheclaimantsoftheuseof  theirrecovery    duringtheinordinatelylongperiodoftimethismatterwasunderadvisementwiththe  trieroffact.    See Myint ,970S.W.2dat927. `5+4 Accordingly,weholdthattheCommissionersdecisiontodenytheclaimantsrequestforprejudgmentinterest  constitutes    a 8.8  manifestandpalpableabuseofdiscretion. Id. ; Alexander ,974 P  S.W.2dat692; Wilder ,912S.W.2dat727.Insoholding,we   acknowledgethatneithertheexistence,northeamount,oftheStatesobligationtotheclaimantswascertain;however,aswehavepreviouslyexplained,thesearenottheonlyfactors  tobeconsideredin    theprejudgmentinterestanalysis. Myint ,970   S.W.2dat92728.Onthecontrary,theoverridingconsiderationiswhatisequitableundertheparticularcircumstancesofthecase. Id. at927.Weholdthatinthisinstance,fairness   mandatesanawardofprejudgmentinteresttotheclaimants. Id.  h    ` Thequestionremainswhethertheclaimantsareentitledtoprejudgmentinterestforall,oronlyaportionof,the  periodoftime    betweenthecompletionofthe  hearing    andtheentryofthejudgment.Asindicatedearlier,theCommissionerdidnotreceivetheclaimantsproposedfindingsoffactuntil  February,    1995.Hisfinaldecreewasenteredapproximatelytwoyearsandfivemonthslater.Underthesecircumstances,anawardofprejudgmentinterestfromthedateofthe  hearing    wouldnotbeappropriate;however,webelievethattheclaimantsareentitledtoprejudgmentinterestfromthepointatwhichtheCommissionerreasonablycouldhavebeenexpectedtorenderadecision.Inouropinion,thatpointwouldhavebeenapproximately90days  after  the  filingofthelastproposedfindingsoffact.         #  4         Sincethe 1&. claimantssubmittedtheirproposedfindingsonoraroundFebruary9,1995,90daysfromthatdatewouldbeapproximatelyMay10,1995.TheCommissionersjudgmentwasfiledonJuly28,1997, 6+4 roughlytwentysixmonths   aftertheaforementioned90dayp  e   perio   eriod later .    Wethereforeconcludethattheclaimantsareentitledtoprejudgmentinterestforaperiodoftwoyearsandtwomonths.      @88)  IV.       `  The    Commissionersorderdenyingtheclaimantsrequestforprejudgmentinterestisreversed.ThiscaseisremandedtotheClaimsCommissionfortheentryofanordermodifyingthejudgmenttoawardtheclaimantsprejudgmentinterestintheamountof$16,250.      #  5         Costsonappealareassessedtothe  appellee.P        `     h     __________________________   `     h     CharlesD.Susano,Jr.,J.CONCUR:_________________________HerschelP.Franks,J._________________________DonT.McMurray,J.