Citrus Canker plaintiff's motion

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR LEECOUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL ACTION

RAYMOND A. DELLASELVA, et al., CASE NO. 03-1947 CA WCM

Plaintiffs,

vs.

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OFAGRICULTURE AND CONSUMERSERVICES, et al.,

Defendants.________________________________/

PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PREJUDGMENT INTEREST

Plaintiffs and the Class request entry of an order awarding prejudgment interest and in

support thereof, state as follows:

1. On July 3, 2014, the jury returned a verdict awarding Plaintiffs and the Class full

compensation in the amount of $285.25 per tree for each of the 33,957 trees covered by this case.

Based on the $285.25 per-tree amount multiplied by 33,957 trees, the total amount of compensation

awarded to Plaintiffs and the Class is $9,686,573.82. See Exhibit 1.

2. The verdict also determined that the Defendants are entitled to certain set-offs,

representing the (i) total amount of $55 statutory tree payments actually issued to and used by

Plaintiffs and Class members ($1,001,000.00), and (ii) total amount used by those Plaintiffs and

Class members who applied for and received Shade Florida (Wal-Mart) Cards ($724,087.00). See

Exhibit 1. The total amount of these set-offs is $1,725,087.00.

3. After deducting the set-offs, the principal amount of compensation recovered by

Plaintiffs and the Class is $7,961,486.82.

Filing # 15894913 Electronically Filed 07/14/2014 05:28:35 PM

Case No. 03-1947 CA WCM

2

4. Plaintiffs and the Class are entitled to prejudgment interest on the principal amount of

compensation recovered, after deduction of the set-offs. See Article X, section 6(a), Florida

Constitution; Behm v. State Department of Transportation, 383 So. 2d 216, 218 (Fla. 1980); Stewart

v. City of Key West, 429 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); section74.061, Florida Statutes.

5. In the related Broward County citrus canker case, the Court awarded prejudgment

interest on the full amount of compensation recovered, based on the number of trees destroyed

during each year of the class period after deducting the applicable set-offs in the years in which they

were issued. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the Broward Circuit Court’s Order

awarding prejudgment interest. Department of Agriculture v. Bogorff, 35 So. 3d 84, 90 (Fla. 4th

DCA 2010).

6. In this case, the total amount of prejudgment interest due through July 3, 2014 (the

date of the verdict) is $4,573,152.00, with a per diem of $1,036.04 thereafter, based on the number of

trees destroyed during each year of the class period after deducting the set-offs in the years in which

they were issued. A spreadsheet reflecting these calculations is attached as Exhibit 2.1 The

methodology used in calculating prejudgment interest in this case is identical to the methodology

used in the related Broward County case and affirmed by the Fourth District.

7. Based on the foregoing, this Court should award prejudgment interest of

$4,573,152.00 through July 3, 2014, with a per diem of $1,036.04 thereafter through the date of entry

of the final judgment. A proposed Order is attached as Exhibit 3.

1 The applicable statutory prejudgment interest rates during 2002-2014 are 9% for 2002; 6% for2003; 7% for 2004 and 2005; 9% for 2006; 11% for 2007 and 2008, 8% for 2009, 6% for 2010, 6%from January 1, 2011 - September 30, 2011, 4.75% from October 1, 2011 - December 31, 2011, and4.75% for 2012, 2013 and 2014. See Florida Department of Financial Services Statutory Interest

Rates.

Case No. 03-1947 CA WCM

3

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs and the Class request entry of an order awarding prejudgment

interest, and such other relief as this Court deems appropriate.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

WE HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 14, 2014 a true and correct copy of the foregoing has

been electronically filed with the Clerk of Lee County by using the Florida Courts eFiling Portal and

served on Wesley R. Parsons, Esq. ([email protected]), Clarke Silverglate, P.A. and Karen

H. Curtis, Esquire ([email protected]), 799 Brickell Plaza, Suite 900, Miami, FL 33131.

William S. WilliamsMargaret M. BichlerLytal Reiter, LLP515 N. Flagler DriveSuite 1000West Lee, FL 33401Tel: (561) 655-1990Fax: (561) [email protected]@palmbeachlaw.com

/s/ Robert C. GilbertRobert C. GilbertFlorida Bar No. 561861Grossman Roth, P.A.2525 Ponce de Leon BoulevardSuite 1150Coral Gables, FL 33134Tel: (305) 442-8666Fax: (305) [email protected]

Michael J. PucilloBerman DeValerio3507 Kyoto Gardens DriveSuite 200Lee Gardens, FL 33410Tel: (561) 835-9400Fax: (561) [email protected]

Jamie Alan ColeWeiss Serota HelfmanPastoriza Cole & Boniske, P.A.200 East Broward BoulevardSuite 1900Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301Tel: (954) 763-4242Fax: (954) [email protected]

Counsel for Plaintiffs and the Class

mailto:[email protected]





EXHIBIT 1

EXHIBIT 2

Lee Gounty Citrus GankerSummary of Prejudgment Interest Galculation (Using Varying Rates)

Total Verdict: July 3,2014 $ 9,686,234

Summary of lnterest and Per diem rate calculation:

Year # of Days lnterest Amt Per Diem Rate153

365

366365

365

365

366

365

365

273

92

366

365184

4,355 $ 4,573,152

Balance Summary:Total Verdict before interestTotal Payments / "Set Offs" deductedlnterest on declining o/s balance @ varying ratesBalance due principal + interest

PrincipallnterestP+l @ 07103114 @ varying applicable Statutory lnt. Rates

20022003200420052006200720082009201020112011201220132014

$ 3,43355,943

159,434391,501735,654877,207878,149636,892477,669357,27095,316

379,191378,154190,631

$

$

$

$

$$

$

$

$

$

$$

$

$

22.44153.27435.61

1,072.602,015.492,403.312,399.311,744.911,308.681,308.681,036.041,036.041,036.041,036.04

$ 9,686,234(1,725,087)4,573,152

$ 12,534,299

$ 7 ,961,1474,573,152

$ 12,534,299

1 of 16

Lee County Citrus Canker LitigationSummary of Relevant Data for Prejudgment lnterest CalculationsFrom 8/1/2002 to July 3,2014

Event Lee County Citrus Canker Judgment Summary

Total Verdict (Before interest) & Offsets

Statutory lnterest Rates by year: # of Days

200220032004200520062007200820092010201120112012201320'14

Total # of days

I 00%6 00%7.00%7 00%9.00%

11.00%11.00%8.00%6 00%6.00%4.75o/o

4.75%4.75%4.75%

15336536636536536536636536527392

366365184

$ 9,686,234

(8t1t02-'t2J31t021

sum (11'ln1 b 9/30/11)

365 (10/l/11 toí-21311111

(11'll14to 7l3l14l

Value ofTrees Destroyed

4,355

Summary of Destruction of Trees by Year:

Year of # Trees AmountDestruction DestroYed Per tree

20022003200420052006

3256,6074,415

22,54862

$285.25$285.25$285.25$285.25$285.25

92,7061,884,6471,259,3796,431,817

17,686

33,957

Statutory Pmt SFL Gard

$ 9,686,234

Total"Set-Offs"

Summary of "Set-Offs" by year:

Year2OO2 $ - 2,203

2003 128,150 86,458

2004 142,670 100,531

2005 589,325 256,1142006 131 ,780 261J402oo7 8,745 17,545

2008 330 97

$ 1,001,000 $ 724,087

2,203214,608243,201845,439392,920

26,290427

2,203214,608243,201845,439392,92026,290

427

$ 1,725,087

BFWD After Set-offs& Addtl trees 84 lnterest

90,5031,760,5422,776,7208,363,0987,987,8647 ,961,5747,961,147

Bfwdby Year

Value ofTrees Destroyed

Total"Set-Offs"

2002200320042005200620062006

92,7061,884,6471,259,3796,431,817

17,686

$ 9,686,234 $ 1,725,087

2of16

Lee County Gitrus CankerPrejudgment Interest Galculation (Using Varying Rates)

TotalVerdict

Bfwd from 81112002:

Value of Trees DestroyedSet-offsBalance due as of 12131102

$ 9,686,234

$

YR1

YRlYR1

200220022002

92,706(2,2031

$ 90,503

Amortization Schedule

lnterest Rate 9.00% Rate for 2002

lnterest amount BalanceDate

AddtlTrees/(SetOffs)

Applied toPrincipal

Bfwd August 1,2002August 1,2002

October 15,2002October 15,2002

December 31,2002(2,203) (2,203)

1,714

1,718

92,70692,70692,70690,50390,50390,50390,50390,50390,50390,50390,503

2 20

3 of 16

Lee County Citrus CankerPrejudgment Interest Galculation (Using Varying Rates)

TotalVerdict

Bfwd from 12131102

Value of Trees DestroyedSet-offsBalance due as oI'12131103

$ 9,686,234

$ 90,5031,994,647(214,608)

YR2YR2YR2

200320032003 $ 1,760,542


Date

lnterest Rate

AddtlTrees/(Set-Offs)

Applied toPrincipal

6.00% Rate for 2003

lnterest amount Balance

Bfwd 90,50390,503

975,149760,542760,542

December 31,2002June 30, 2003June 30, 2003June 30, 2003

December 31, 2003

1,884,647(214,608)

1,884,647(214,608)

2,693

53,250

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

760,542760,542760,542760,542760,542760,542

1,670,039 670,03 55.943

4of16

Lee Gounty Gitrus CankerPrejudgment lnterest Calculation (Using Varying Rates)

Total Verdict

Bfwd from 12131103

Value of Trees DestroyedSet-offsBalance due as of 121311O4

$ 9,686,234

YR3YR3YR3

200420042004

$ 1,760,542,1,259,379

(243,2011

$ 2,776,720


Date

lnterest Rate


7.00% Rate for 2004

lnterestamount

Applied toPrincipal Balance

Bfwd December 31, 2003June 30, 2004June 30, 2004June 30, 2004

December 31,2004

1,259,379(243,201)

1,259,379(243,201)

61,4501,760,5421,760,5423,019,9202,776,7202,776,7202,776,7202,776,7202,776,7202,776,7202,776,7202,776,720

97,984

1,016,',178 1,0'16,178 159,434

5of16

Lee County Citrus CankerPrejudgment lnterest Calculation (Using Varying Rates)

TotalVerdict

Bfwd from 12131104


$ 9,686,234

$ 2,776,7206,43',1,8',,7

(845,439)YR4

YR4YR4

200520052005 $ 8,363,098


Date

lnterest Rate

Addtl Trees/(SetOffs)

Applied toPrincipal

7.00% Rate for 2005


Bfwd December 31,2004June 30, 2005June 30, 2005June 30, 2005

December3l,2005

6,431,817(845,43e)

6,431,817(845,439)

96,386

295,114

2,776,7202,776,7209,208,5378,363,0988,363,0988,363,0988,363,0988,363,0988,363,0989,363,0988,363,098

5,586,379 5,586,379 391,501

6of16

Lee County Citrus GankerPrejudgment Interest Galculation (Using Varying Rates)

TotalVerdict

Bfwd from 12131105

Value of Trees DestroyedSet-offsBalance due as of 1213'1106

$ 9,686,234

YR5YR5YR5

200620062006

$ 8,363,09817,685

(392,920)

$ 7,987,864


Date

lnterest Rate


Applied toPrincipal

9.00% Rate for 2006


Bfwd December 31, 2005June 30, 2006June 30, 2006June 30, 2006

December 31, 2006

17,686(392,920)

17,686(3e2,920)

373,246

362,408

9,363,0988,363,0988,380,7847,987,8637,987,8637,987,8637,987,8637,987,8637,987,8637,987,8637,987,864

(375,235) 1,375,235) 735,654

7 ofl6

Lee County Citrus GankerPrejudgment lnterest Calculation (Using Varying Rates)

TotalVerdict

Bfwd from 12131106

Value of Trees DestroyedSet-offsBalance due as oÍ 12131107

$ 9,686,234

YR6YR6YR6

200720072007

$ 7,987,864

(26,290)

$ 7,961,574


lnterest Rate 11.00% Rate for 2007

Date


Applied toPrincipal lnterest amount Balance

Bfwd December 31, 2006June 30, 2007June 30, 2007

December 31,2007

435,722

441,486

7,987,8647,987,8647,961,5747,961,5747,961,5747,961,5747 ,961,5747 ,961,5747 ,961,5747,961,5747,961,574

(26,290) (26,290)

Q6,2s0l .290) 877,207

I of 16

Lee County Citrus CankerPrejudgment lnterest Galculation (Using Varying Rates)

TotalVerdict $ 9,686,234

Bfwd from 12131107

Value of Trees DestroyedSet-offsBalance due as of '12131108

YR7YR7YR7

200820082008

$ 7,961,574

(4271

ç 7,961,147


Date

lnterest Rate


Applied toPrincipal

11.00% Rate for 2008


Bfwd December 31,2007June 30, 2008June 30, 2008

December 31,2008(427)

436,687

441,462

7 ,961,5747,961,5747,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477 ,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477 ,961,147

(427)

9 of 16

Lee Gounty Citrus CankerPrejudgment lnterest Calculation (Using Varying Rates)


Bfwd from 1213'1108


YR8YR8YR8

200920092009

ç 7,96',1,147

ç 7,961,147


Date

lnterest Rate


Applied toPrincipal

8.00% Rate for 2009


Bfwd December 31, 2008June 30, 2009June 30, 2009

December 31, 2009

315,829

321,063

7,961,1477,961,1477 ,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477 ,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,147

636 892

10 of 16

Lee Gounty Citrus CankerPrejudgment lnterest Calculation (Using Varying Rates)


Bfwd from 12131109

Value of Trees DestroyedSet-offsBalance due as of '1213'1110

YR9YR9YR9

201020102010

$ 7,961,147

$ 7,961,147


Date

lnterest Rate

AddtlTreesi(Set-Offs)

Applied toPrincipal

6.00% Rate for 2010


Bfwd December 31, 2009June 30,2010June 30, 2010

December 31,2010

236,871

240,797

7,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,96'1,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,147

477,669

11 of 16

Lee Gounty Citrus CankerPrejudgment lnterest Galculation (Using Varying Rates)

TotalVerdict

Bfwd from 121311'10

Value of Trees DestroyedSet-offs

$ 9,686,234

YR IO

YR 10

YR 1O

20112011201',,

$ 7,961,147

$ 7,961,147


Date

lnterest Rate


Applied toPrincipal

6.00% Rate for 2011


Bfwd December 31,2010June 30, 201 1

June 30, 201 1

September 30,2011

236,871

120,399

7,961,1477,961,1477 ,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,147

357 270

12 of 16



Bfwd from 9/30/11Value of Trees DestroyedSet-offs

Balance due as of 121311'11

YR 10

YR 10

YR 10

201120112011

ç 7,961,147

$ 7,961,',147


lnterest Rate


Applied toPrincipal

4.75% Rate for 2011 (10t1t11-12t31t11)

Date lnterest amount Balance

Bfwd September 30,2011December 31,2011 95,316

7 ,961,1477 ,961,1477,961,1477 ,961,1477 ,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477 ,961,1477 ,961,1477,961,1477,961,147

95,316

13 of 16



Bfwd from '12131111Value of Trees DestroyedSet-offsBafance due as of 1213'1112

YR 11

YR I1

YR 1I

201220122012

$ 7,96',1,'147

$ 7,96',1,147


Date

lnterest Rate


Applied toPrincipal

4.75% Rate for 2012


Bfwd December 31,2011June 30,2012June 30, 2012

December 31,2012

188,559

190,631

7,961,1477,961,1477 ,961,1477 ,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,147

379,191

14 of 16



Bfwd from 121311'12

Value of Trees DestroyedSet-offsBalance due as of 121311'13

YR 12

YR 12

YR I2

201320132013

ç 7,961,',147

$ 7,961,',147


Date

lnterest Rate


Applied toPrincipal

4.75% Rate for 2013


Bñ¡'/d December 31,2012June 30,2013June 30,2013

December 31,2013

187,523

190,631

7 ,961,1477 ,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,147

378,',154

15 of 16

Lee County Gitrus CankerPrejudgment Interest Calculation (Using Varying Rates)


Bfwd from 121311'13

Value of Trees DestroyedSet-offsJudgment Day 7l3l'14

YR 13

YR 13

YR 13

201420142014

g 7,961,147

5 7,96',1,147


Date

lnterest Rate


Applied toPrincipal

4.75% Rate for 2014


Bfwd December 31,2013June 30, 2014June 30,2014

July 3, 2014

187,523

3,108

7,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477,961,1477 ,961,1477,961,1477,961,147

190,631

16 of 16

EXHIBIT 3

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR LEECOUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL ACTION

RAYMOND A. DELLASELVA, et al., CASE NO. 03-1947 CA WCM

Plaintiffs,

vs.

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OFAGRICULTURE AND CONSUMERSERVICES, et al.,

Defendants.________________________________/

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’MOTION FOR PREJUDGEMENT INTEREST

THIS CAUSE came before the Court on ___________ ___, 2014, on Plaintiffs’ Motion for

Prejudgment Interest. Having reviewed the motion, other relevant portions of the record, and having

heard argument of counsel, this Court ORDERS and ADJUDGES as follows:

1. On July 3, 2014, the jury returned a verdict awarding Plaintiffs and the Class full

compensation in the amount of $285.25 per-tree for each of the 33,957 trees covered by this case.

Based on the per-tree amount ($285.25) and the total number of trees (33,957), the full amount of

compensation recovered is $9,686,573.82. The verdict also determined that the Defendants are

entitled to certain set-offs, representing the (i) total amount of $55 statutory tree payments issued to

and used by Plaintiffs and Class members ($1,001,000.00), and (ii) the total amount used by those

Plaintiffs and Class members who applied for and received Shade Florida (Wal-Mart) Cards

($724,087.00). The total amount of these set-offs is $1,725,087.00. After deducting these set-offs,

the principal amount of compensation recovered by Plaintiffs and the Class is $7,961,486.82, before

prejudgment interest.

Case No. 02-13717 AJ

2

2. Property owners in inverse condemnation proceedings are entitled to prejudgment

interest from the date their property is taken or surrendered. See Article X, section 6 (a), Florida

Constitution; section 74.061, Florida Statutes; Behm v. State Department of Transportation, 383 So.

2d 216, 218 (Fla. 1980); Stewart v. City of Key West, 429 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1983); State

Road Department v. Bender, 147 Fla. 15, 2 So. 2d 298 (Fla. 1941); County of Volusia v. Pickens, 439

So. 2d 276, (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).

3. In Department of Agriculture v. Bogorff, 35 So. 3d 84, 90 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010), the

Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s award of prejudgment interest in the related

Broward County citrus canker compensation litigation. The facts and methodology for calculating

prejudgment interest in this case are identical to those in Bogorff.

4. Based on the foregoing, this Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ Motion for Prejudgment

Interest.

5. According to the spreadsheet attached as Exhibit 2 to Plaintiffs’ motion, the amount

of prejudgment interest due through July 3, 2014, is Four Million Five Hundred Seventy Three

Thousand One Hundred Fifty Two and 00/100 Dollars ($4,573,152.00), with a per diem of One

Thousand Thirty-Six and 04/100 Dollars ($1,036.04). Defendants have not challenged the accuracy

of these calculations.

6. Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that Plaintiffs and the Class shall recover

prejudgment interest in the sum of Four Million Five Hundred Seventy Three Thousand One

Hundred Fifty Two and 00/100 Dollars ($4,573,152.00) through July 3, 2014, with a per diem of

One Thousand Thirty-Six and 04/100 Dollars ($1,036.04) thereafter through the entry of final

judgment. Based on the date of entry of this Order, the per diem of $1,306.04 from July 4, 2014

Case No. 02-13717 AJ

3

through _________ ___, 2014 totals _____________________________ and ___/100 Dollars

Dollars ($____________). These amounts shall be incorporated into the final judgment to be entered

in this action.

DONE and ORDERED in Chambers at Ft. Myers, Lee County, Florida this _____ day of

_________, 2014.

________________________________Honorable Keith R. Kyle

Circuit Court Judge

Copies furnished to:

Robert C. Gilbert, Esq.William S. Williams, Esq.Wesley R. Parsons, Esq.

Citrus Canker plaintiff's motion

Documents

Transcript of Citrus Canker plaintiff's motion