Summary
The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed the prejudgment-interest portion of a judgment in favor of ARCPE Bahamas, LLC. The court held that ARCPE failed to present competent substantial evidence of the LIBOR or substitute index values necessary to calculate interest under the adjustable-rate promissory note, and therefore directed the trial court to remove the prejudgment-interest award without allowing ARCPE another opportunity to present evidence.
Holdings
- The prejudgment interest award was unsupported by competent substantial evidence because ARCPE failed to present evidence of the LIBOR variable necessary to calculate the contractual adjustable interest rates and total interest due.
- Testimony concerning the contents of business records or other data that were not admitted into evidence was inadmissible hearsay and could not establish the LIBOR rates necessary to calculate prejudgment interest.
- Because ARCPE had already received an opportunity to present evidence of the LIBOR Index and applicable change dates and rates, the appellate court would not provide a second opportunity to prove the interest amount; the prejudgment interest award had to be removed rather than recalculated on remand.
Questions Presented
- Whether competent substantial evidence supported the trial court's calculation of prejudgment interest under an adjustable-rate promissory note.
- Whether testimony about the contents of unadmitted interest-rate databases and indices was admissible under the hearsay exceptions for business records or commercial publications.
- Whether the trial court could calculate the contractual interest rate and prejudgment interest amount without evidence of the LIBOR variable for the relevant change dates.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (26)
- Robertson v. Hochstatter, 369 So. 3d 716, 718 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023)(followed)
- Bugg v. State, 295 So. 3d 1238, 1244 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020)(followed)
- Anderson v. State, 230 So. 3d 175, 176 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)(followed)
- Wright v. Guy Yudin & Foster, LLP, 176 So. 3d 368, 373 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)(followed)
- Zupnik Haverland, L.L.C. v. Current Builders of Fla., Inc., 7 So. 3d 1132, 1134 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)(followed)
- Reimbursement Recovery, Inc. v. Indian River Mem'l Hosp., Inc., 22 So. 3d 679, 682 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)(followed)
- Mem'l Health Sys., Inc. v. Hamilton Staffing Sols., Inc., 414 So. 3d 350, 351 (Fla. 5th DCA 2025)(followed)
- Westgate Mia. Beach, LTD. v. Newport Operating Corp., 55 So. 3d 567, 576 (Fla. 2010)(followed)
- DSLRPros, Inc. v. Lalo, 339 So. 3d 379, 383 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021)(followed)
- Republic Srvs., Inc. v. Calabrese, 939 So. 2d 225, 226 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 26.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…