Judgment Enforcement: 10% Postjudgment Interest Runs From Date of Earlier Judgment, Even When Costs and Fee Awards Occurred Down The Line

Court of Appeal Construes Judgment By Its Terms and Per CCP § 685.020(a).

     So, here is one for all of you judgment enforcement addicts. (Are there such things? Some, we likely believe.)

     Commercial tenant did pretty well in a convoluted lease modification and rent renewal dispute, beating the claims of landlord as well as being awarded costs of $52,768.84 (the full monty) and fees of $1,798,105 (out of a requested $2.5 million).

     Losing landlord was less enthused, appealing in Pacific Pejiu Wu Restaurant Partners v. Haramis, Case Nos. A123117, A123918, & A124430 (1^st Dist., Div. 5 Apr. 2, 2010) (unpublished).

     Landlord was no more thrilled when his appeal was unsuccessful.

     The literal terms of the judgment called for the fees and costs to be added to the judgment pursuant to a costs memorandum, with interest running from the date of entry of judgment. Because landlord did not object to the form of this judgment, its claim of error was waived. (P R Burke Corp. v. Victor Valley Wastewater Reclamation Authority, 98 Cal.App.4^th 1047, 1052 (2002).)

     Beyond that, however, landlord’s claim lacked merit. Postjudgment interest of 10% per annum runs as of the date of entry of judgment, which may sweep in later costs and fee awards. (Code Civ. Proc., § 685.020(a).)