Rohring v. New York City Housing Authority, 86 N.Y.2d 68 (1995)

When a statute sets a maximum interest rate on judgments against a public authority, courts have discretion to award a lower rate than the statutory maximum, considering the specific circumstances of the case.

Summary

In a personal injury action against the New York City Housing Authority, the plaintiff sought a 9% interest rate on the judgment, as per CPLR 5004. The Housing Authority argued for a lower rate based on prevailing Treasury Bill rates. The Supreme Court awarded 9% interest. The Court of Appeals held that Public Housing Law § 157(5), which states that the interest rate “shall not exceed nine per centum per annum,” grants courts discretion to set a rate lower than 9%. The Court reasoned that the statute establishes a maximum rate, not a mandatory one, and remitted the case for the Supreme Court to exercise its discretion.

Facts

Plaintiff sued the New York City Housing Authority for personal injuries sustained due to a fall in a building maintained by the Authority. The plaintiff alleged the floor was wet, slippery, and littered with debris. A jury found in favor of the plaintiff, awarding damages for past and future pain and suffering, lost earnings, and medical expenses.

Procedural History

The trial court awarded the plaintiff 9% interest on the judgment pursuant to CPLR 5004. The Housing Authority appealed, arguing for a lower interest rate of 5.35% based on Treasury Bill rates. The Appellate Division affirmed the trial court’s decision. The New York Court of Appeals granted leave to appeal.

Issue(s)

Whether Public Housing Law § 157(5) grants courts discretion to award an interest rate lower than 9% on judgments against the Housing Authority, or whether it mandates a fixed rate of 9%.

Holding

No, because Public Housing Law § 157(5) establishes a maximum interest rate of 9%, but does not mandate that rate. The statute