Hi there KSJ and welcome to the board!
Some of us work LONG hours here! Anyway, read this PA court case concerning an appeal by a defendant over the interest charged by the utility company after they obtained a judgment against him... I would use this as ammo in any PA court.....
J. A29009/02
2002 PA Super 338
EQUITABLE GAS COMPANY,
:
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
:
PENNSYLVANIA
:
Appellant
:
v.
:
:
BETTY F. WADE,
:
:
Appellee
:
No. 183 WDA 2002
Appeal from the Judgment entered on
December 31, 2001, in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny
County, Civil Division, at No. AR00-7958.
BEFORE: LALLY-GREEN, BENDER, and GRACI, JJ.
OPINION BY LALLY-GREEN, J.:
Filed: October 31, 2002
¶1
Appellant, Equitable Gas Company, appeals from the judgment
entered on December 31, 2001, following a non-jury verdict in Appellant's
favor. Appellant challenges the trial court's ruling on post-judgment
interest. We affirm.
¶2
The factual and procedural history of the case is as follows. Appellant
is a public utility supplying gas to customers in the Pittsburgh area.
Defendant/Appellee, Betty F. Wade, is a customer of Appellant. On
December 20, 2000, Appellant filed a complaint alleging that as of December
4, 2000, Wade owed $5,992.43 in overdue gas bills. Appellant sought
judgment in the amount of $5,992.43, plus pre-judgment interest, plus
post-judgment interest at the rate of 18%.
¶3
The legal rate of post-judgment interest is 6% per year, pursuant to
42 Pa.C.S.A. § 8101. Appellant contended that 18% post-judgment interest
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. A29009/02
was collectible pursuant to a lawful tariff stating that Appellant was entitled
to collect up to 18% annual interest on delinquent accounts until the bill is
paid.
¶4
On February 13, 2001, Wade filed a motion for partial judgment on the
pleadings. Wade argued that any post-judgment interest awarded in the
case should be set at the 6% statutory rate. On May 24, 2001, the trial
court (Wettick, J.) granted Wade's motion and struck Appellant's claim for
18% post-judgment interest.
¶5
The case proceeded to arbitration. On June 22, 2001, the board of
arbitrators entered an award in Appellant's favor in the principal amount of
$5,320.88.1 Appellant appealed to the Court of Common Pleas. On
December 27, 2001, the trial court entered a non-jury verdict in Appellant's
favor in the amount of $5,320.88, plus prejudgment interest at 18%, plus
post-judgment interest at 6%. The verdict was entered on the docket on
December 31, 2001. Both parties filed post-trial motions, but Appellant filed
its notice of appeal before the trial court disposed of the motions.2
¶6
Appellant raises four issues on appeal:
A.
Whether the mere entry of judgment is sufficient to
constitute payment of a debt?
1 The reason for the discrepancy between the principal amount awarded and the principal
amount demanded is unclear.
2 The trial court did not order Appellant to file a Concise Statement of Matters Complained of
on Appeal under Pa.R.A.P. 1925, and did not issue a Rule 1925 opinion.
2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. A29009/02
B.
Whether 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 8101 should preempt
Equitable's tariff rate for late charges after entry of
judgment?
C.
Whether a utility's tariff should be interpreted as if it
were a contract or construed as a statute?
D.
Whether the trial court has jurisdiction to interpret a
tariff contrary to its plain meaning and thus
effectively change a rate established by tariff?
Appellant's Brief at 7.
¶7
Although styled as four arguments, Appellant raises four aspects of a
single argument. Specifically, Appellant contends that it holds a lawful tariff
authorizing a late charge of up to 18% per year until Wade's gas bill is paid
in full, and that this 18% rate should apply to the judgment amount, rather
than the 6% statutory rate of post-judgment interest.
¶8
The statute governing post-judgment interest is set forth at 42
Pa.C.S.A. § 8101, which states:
§ 8101. Interest on judgments
Except as otherwise provided by another
statute, a judgment for a specific sum of money
shall bear interest at the lawful rate from the date of
the verdict, or from the date of the judgment, if the
judgment is not entered upon a verdict or award.
42 Pa.C.S.A. § 8101 (emphasis added). The legal rate is 6% per year. 41
P.S. § 202.
¶9
The judgment at issue is "a judgment for a specific sum of money,"
and the legal rate will apply unless statutory authority provides for a
different rate. Appellant argues that it is entitled to a rate of 18%, based on
3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
