IDC Properties, Inc v. Chicago Title Insurance Company

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
IDC PROPERTIES, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE
COMPANY,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
C.A. No. 09-cv-632-JJM
ORDER
Before the Court are two motions that question when prejudgment interest
begins to accrue in this case, and when does it stop accruing. ECF No. 203, 204. The
answer, as briefly explained below, is prejudgment interest accrues from April 8, 2005
until February 6, 2026 at the state statutory rate of 12 percent per annum.
“In diversity cases, state law must be applied in determining whether and how
much prejudgment interest should be awarded.”
	Fratus v. Republic W. Ins. Co.,147
F.3d 25, 30 (1st Cir. 1998). 	Rhode Island’s prejudgment interest statute provides
that:
In any civil action in which a verdict is rendered or a decision made for
pecuniary damages, there shall be added by the clerk of the court to the
amount of damages interest at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per
annum thereon from the date the cause of action accrued, which shall
be included in the judgment entered therein.
R.I. Gen. Laws § 9-21-10(a).
“The point from which prejudgment interest accrues is the date from which
Plaintiff’s damages actually began, or put another way, from the point at which he
Case 1:09-cv-00632-JJM-PAS Document 208 Filed 03/31/26 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:
<pageID>

2
was entitled to his money, and did not receive it[.]”
Buckley v. Brown Plastics Mach.,
LLC, 368 F. Supp. 2d 167, 171 (D.R.I. 2005). The Rhode Island Supreme Court has
described the accrual date as the date the prevailing party first “sustain[ed] . . .
damages,”
Blue Ribbon Beef Co., v. Napolitano, 696 A.2d 1225, 1228 (R.I. 1997), and
as “the date of the injury.”
Metropolitan Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Barry, 892 A.2d 915,
922 (R.I. 2006).
Here, the accrual date is clear. Prejudgment interest should begin to run from
April 8, 2005, because it was on that date that the Rhode Island Supreme Court
determined that the South and West Units had not been properly created and thus
were common elements of the GIS Condominium.
Am. Condo. Ass’n v. IDC, Inc., 870
A.2d 434, 440 (R.I. 2005). 	IDC first had the right to seek court-redress for its lost
opportunity to construct buildings on the South and West Units on that date.
	IDC
Props., Inc. v. Chicago Title Ins. Co., 42 F.4th 1, 5, 11-12 (1st Cir. 2022).
Also, the Court finds that the end date for prejudgment interest is the date
final judgment entered in this case – February 6, 2026. 	While Chicago Title has
suggested an earlier date, the prejudgment interest statute’s purpose and intent are
best served in this case by running prejudgment interest from the time of judgment.
Before that time, Chicago Title was free to settle this matter or pay the judgment
amount (which was determined earlier) – thereby ending the accrual of prejudgment
interest.
The Court DENIES Chicago Title’s Motion to Alter Judgment (ECF No. 203)
and GRANTS the IDC’s Motion to Alter Judgment. ECF No. 204. The final judgment
Case 1:09-cv-00632-JJM-PAS Document 208 Filed 03/31/26 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:
<pageID>

3
is hereby amended to provide for 12 percent per annum interest on the judgment
beginning April 8, 2005 and ending February 6, 2026.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/John J. McConnell, Jr.
_________________________________
JOHN J. MCCONNELL, JR.
Chief Judge
United States District Court
March 31, 2026
Case 1:09-cv-00632-JJM-PAS Document 208 Filed 03/31/26 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:
<pageID>