J. BARROWS, INC., Appellee, v. Joseph UVINO, Wendy Uvino, Appellants, 514 F. App'x 23

SUMMARY ORDER ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of said District Court be and it hereby is VACATED and REMANDED. Joseph and Wendy Uvino appeal from the judgment, entered October 5, 2012, of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Wexler, /.), which failed to provide for an award of pre-verdict, pre-judgment interest. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, procedural history, and specification of issues for review.

The district court erred in failing to award pre-verdict, pre-judgment interest, which is mandatory in New York for both breach of contract and breach of fiduciary claims. N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 5001(a). “The purpose of § 5001(a)’s award of prejudgment interest in property actions is ‘to assure complete indemnification to plaintiffs whose property ha[s] been damaged by the wrongful act of another.’ ” Lewis v. S.L. & E., Inc., 831 F.2d 37, 39 (2d Cir. 1987) (citation omitted). Pre-judgment interest attaches to the fiduciary duty breach where, as here, the damages awarded were compensatory for property damage. Id.

Thus, “[i]n order to provide the successful claimant with complete indemnification, prejudgment interest must be awarded from the date of the adjudicated deprivation.” Mar Oil, S.A. v. Morrissey, 982 F.2d 830, 845 (2d Cir.1993). We remand to the district court to (1) determine a date for the award of pre-verdict, prejudgment interest; and (2) to adjust the post-verdict interest award to include the pre-verdict, prejudgment interest. N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 5002 (“Interest shall be recovered upon the total sum awarded, including interest to verdict....”).

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court hereby is VACATED and REMANDED.