In Maynard v. Eaton Corp., 119 Ohio St. 3d 443, 2008-Ohio-4542, the Ohio Supreme Court answered a question over which Ohio's Courts of Appeals had reached conflicting decisions, namely, "Does the amendment to R.C. 1343.03, effective June 2, 2004, adjust the 10% rate of post-judgment interest calculated on a final judgment that was entered prior to the date of the amendment, but not paid in full and pending on appeal?" The Court answered in the affirmative, holding that 1) the amendment to R.C. 1343.03(A), enacted pursuant to 2004 Sub.H.B. No. 212 ("H.B. 212"), effective June 2, 2004, applies to cases in which the trial court has entered a final judgment prior to June 2, 2004, but the judgment is not yet paid in full and the case was pending on appeal as of that date; and 2) in calculating postjudgment interest for a case pending as of June 2, 2004, the fixed rate of ten percent per annum in effect prior to June 2, 2004, applies through June 1, 2004, and is to be used to calculate the amount of interest accrued through June 1, 2004, and the annually determined rate provided for under H.B. 212 then applies and is used to calculate the amount of interest to be paid from June 2, 2004, forward.
Prior to H.B. 212's amendment to R.C. 1343.03, the statutory rate for calculating postjudgment interest on a final judgment was fixed at ten percent per annum. H.B. 212, effective June 2, 2004, amended R.C. 1343.03 to provide that postjudgment interest shall be calculated "at the rate per annum determined pursuant to section 5703.47," under which the Ohio Tax Commissioner sets the interest rate per annum based on the federal short-term rate.
Uncodifed law in H.B. 212, Sec. 3 (i.e., law which, although effective as the law of Ohio, is not deemed to be of a "general and permanent nature" and thus does not appear in the Ohio codified statutes) provides that "[t]he interest rate provided for in division (A) of section 1343.03 of the Revised Code, as amended by this act, applies to actions pending on the effective date of this act," and that "[i]n the calculation of interest due under section 1343.03 of the Revised Code, in actions pending on the effective date of this act, the interest rate provided for in section 1343.03 of the Revised Code prior to the amendment of that section by this act shall apply up to the effective date of this act, and the interest rate provided for in section 1343.03 of the Revised Code as amended by this act shall apply on and after that effective date."
In Maynard v. Eaton Corp., Maynard obtained a jury verdict against Eaton Corp., on which judgment was entered on April 2, 2003. Both parties appealed the judgment. Maynard argued that all postjudgment interest due him should be calculated at ten percent, the effective rate on April 2, 2003, when the court entered judgment in his favor. Eaton Corp. responded that as the appeals from the judgment were still active on June 2, 2004 -- the effective date of H.B. 212 -- the case therefore was "pending" as of June 2, 2004, meaning the postjudgment interest rate should be ten percent per annum until through June 1, 2004, and then determined according to the amended R.C. 1343.03 from June 2, 2004 onward.
The Supreme Court agreed with Eaton Corp., holding that as the underlying judgment was on appeal as of June 2, 2004, the matter was "pending" as of that date, meaning the postjudgment interest owed to Maynard was to be calculated at a rate of ten percent per annum through June 1, 2004, and at the rates determined according to the amended R.C. 1343.03 from June 2, 2004 until payment of the postjudgment interest.
