Two insurers for the Jacobs Defendants – Monroe Guaranty Insurance Company and FCCI Insurance Company – refused to participate in the Jacobs Action. Two other insurers – United States Fire Insurance Company and Interstate Fire and Casualty Company – attempted to force Monroe and FCCI to participate by filing a third-party complaint claiming that they were contractually obligated to defend the Jacobs Defendants. Prior to trial in the Jacobs Action, the trial court severed the third-party complaint; it then granted summary judgment in favor of Monroe and FCCI.

A Georgia appellate court ruled that Monroe and FCCI owed coverage to the Jacobs Defendants. After remand to the trial court, the case was removed to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia (the "Insurers' Action").

The district court found Monroe liable to U.S. Fire and Interstate for $632,198.53. The district court asked the insurers to submit "a joint proposed judgment detailing how Monroe's coverage obligations, including any interest, should be distributed among [U.S. Fire and Interstate]."

The parties, however, could not agree on the amount of interest owed by Monroe.

U.S. Fire and Interstate argued that, under Georgia law, O.C.G.A. § 7-4-12, they were entitled to post-judgment interest on the $632,198.53, calculated from the date of the Jacobs Verdict. They reasoned that the district court's award of $632,198.53 should be treated as if it had been awarded when the Jacobs Verdict had been entered. Thus, they argued that they were entitled to $232,094.80 of interest (calculated according to the rate set by Section 7-4-12 (a) and accruing from that date), for a total award of $864,293.33.

Monroe and FCCI countered that the other insurers were not entitled to post-judgment interest under Section 7-4-12.

Georgia Law

Section 7-4-12 provides that parties are automatically entitled to post-judgment interest:

to all judgments in [Georgia] and the interest shall be collectable as a part of each judgment whether or not the judgment specifically reflects the entitlement to postjudgment interest.

The District Court's Decision

The district court ruled that U.S. Fire and Interstate were not entitled to interest under Section 7-4-12 because Section 7-4-12 did "not apply to the present situation."

In its decision, the district court explained that the operative judgment for Section 7-4-12 was the final judgment entered in the Insurers' Action in the district court, not the final judgement entered in the Jacobs Action. The district court observed that the state trial court had severed the Insurers' Action from the Jacobs Action and it decided that the Insurers' Action did "not relate back to the judgment entered against" the Jacobs Defendants.

The Insurers' Action, the district court said, was a "contribution action amongst co-insurers" seeking "to divide a common liability incurred by their co-insured" as a result of the Jacobs Verdict. The Insurers' Action only related to the Jacobs Verdict because the Jacobs Verdict established how much money was potentially owed between the parties to the Insurers' Action as co-insurers of the Jacobs Defendants.

Moreover, the district court observed, the Jacobs Verdict had "long been paid and satisfied by" U.S. Fire and Interstate, and any post-judgment interest under Section 7-4-12 would apply to the final judgment entered in the Insurers' Action only – a judgment, the district court noted, that had "not yet been entered."

Accordingly, the district court concluded, U.S. Fire and Interstate were not entitled to any interest – other than potential post-judgment interest provided by 28 U.S.C. § 1961 – on the final judgment.

The case is Renaissance Recovery Solutions, LLC v. Monroe Guaranty Ins. Co., No. CV 1:14-102 (S.D. Ga. March 15, 2018). Attorneys involved include: For Renaissance Recovery Solutions, LLC, Plaintiff: Stephanie Collings Patel, LEAD ATTORNEY, PRO HAC VICE, Dennis, Corry, Smith & Dixon, LLP, Atlanta, GA; F. Michael Taylor, Brennan, Wasden & Painter, Augusta, GA; For United States Fire Insurance Company, Interstate Fire and Casualty Company, Plaintiffs: Stephanie Collings Patel, LEAD ATTORNEY, PRO HAC VICE, Dennis, Corry, Smith & Dixon, LLP, Atlanta, GA; For Monroe Guaranty Insurance Company, FCCI Insurance Company, Defendants: Stephanie F. Glickauf, LEAD ATTORNEY, Goodman, McGuffey, Lindsey & Johnson, LLP, Atlanta, GA; R. Tyler Bryant, Goodman, McGuffey, Lindsey & Johnson, LLP, Atlanta, GA.