BEFORE:

                                                 HONORABLE RENEE C. RICCIARDELLI
                                                Administrative Supervisory Judge of Compensation

APPEARANCES:

                                                  STARK & STARK, ESQS.
                                                By:            ARTHUR KRAVITZ, ESQ.
                                                Attorney for the Petitioner

                                                MARIO BARNABA, ESQ.
                                                Attorney for the Respondent
 

These are the matters of Stephen Pristas v. Hamilton Township.  The issue before me at the present time is the payment of interest on monies withheld pending appeal to the Appellate Division of the Superior Court. 

On January 21, 1999 Judge Lawrence T. Marinari awarded compensation benefits of 100% total disability to Mr. Pristas.  Respondent filed a timely appeal along with an Application for a stay of Judge Marinari’s Order. Petitioner’s attorney subsequently filed a Motion for interest on monies not paid pursuant to the Order of January 21, 1999. 

Judge Marinari granted both Motions, i.e. the Motion to stay the Order and the Motion for interest. 

Between the date of filing the Application for the stay and the decision by Judge Marinari granting said stay, the respondent paid to the petitioner a “voluntary” offer of 30% of total. 

The Appellate Division of the Superior Court ruled that Judge Marinari’s January 21, 1999 Order for total disability was appropriate in order that the monies be paid, which the respondent did pay in a timely fashion.  However, the Appellate Division found that the Order of Judge Marinari granting interest was inappropriate since the Application for the interest was made prior to the statutory three-month period of time within which an Order must be paid. 

However, in its decision the Appellate Division specifically said that it was reversing Judge Marinari’s Order “without prejudice to petitioner’s right to move for interest before the Judge of Compensation as a result of the affirmance of petitioner’s underlying award by another panel of this court.”  It is obvious from that statement that the Appellate Division envisioned the petitioner filing a Motion for interest due and payable and that the petitioner would be entitled to said interest.

It is the respondent’s contention that since the respondent received an Order to stay the original findings pending the Appellate review, that it not be responsible for any interest that would have accrued as a result of the failure to pay the award.

I find this position spurious.  Although it is admirable that the respondent did file the appropriate Application to stay the award prior to the decision by the Appellate Division rather than just unilaterally refusing to pay, that does not relieve respondent of its obligation to pay the petitioner interest.  The petitioner was deprived of the use of that monies for a finite period of time pending the result of the Appellate Division decision.  It would be unreasonable to assert that the petitioner is not entitled to interest on monies that would have been paid had it not been for the appeal. 

Petitioner is not seeking pre-Judgment interest but merely interest on the amounts of money that were due and owing as of the time of Judge Marinari’s Order. 

It is a well-established principle throughout the judicial system that the prevailing party is entitled to interest on Judgments which are not paid in a timely fashion, albeit as a result of an appeal.

Therefore, I find that the petitioner, Stephen Pristas, is entitled to interest on the monies not paid.  Obviously, respondent is entitled to a credit of the 30% of total voluntary tender that it made between the Order and the final decision of the Appellate Division. 

Petitioner’s attorney is ordered to calculate the interest due and payable and prepare the appropriate Order.

There will be a $150 stenographic fee payable by the respondent.

                                                                         _____________________________________

                                                                        Renee C. Ricciardelli
                                                                        Administrative Supervisory Judge of Compensation

August 2, 2001