Olympia Marble & Granite v. Mayes

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that calculation of prejudgment interest is not ministerial act “if the record reveals facts that call into question the date on which prejudgment interest should accrue.... [I]n such a case, the judgment is not final.”
• distinguishing Magan and holding that nothing in affidavit offered to support substituted service pursuant to subsection (b)(1) of rule 106 indicated that defendant would be at substituted service location at time indicated in motion
• reversing default judgment when affidavit did not state that address for substitute service was defendant’s usual place of place of business or business owner’s usual place of abode
• where record does not indicate whether plaintiff sent defendant written notice of its claims, prejudgment interest should be calculated from date plaintiff filed suit
• where record does not indicate whether plaintiff sent defendant wilt-ten notice of its claims, prejudgment interest should be calculated from date plaintiff filed suit
• “If the amount awarded by the judgment cannot be determined, the judgment is interlocutory”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).