Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

M. Bender & Son, Inc. v. West 16th Street Realty Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Decided April 10, 1972No. 71-1152Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

SWYGERT

(dissenting in part and concurring in part).

I dissent only from Judge Sprecher’s finding that interest accrued from December 1962, the time of the last payment on account. Section 19-12-103, Ind.Stat.Ann., requires that two conditions be fulfilled before interest will accrue. Interest is computed “upon the day an itemized bill shall have been rendered and payment demanded.” In Scot-co v. Dormeyer Indus., 402 F.2d 336 (7th Cir. 1968), the fact that all bills had been sent as of a certain date was not sufficient to trigger the assessment of interest. The court required a further act, the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Scotco, Inc. v. Dormeyer Industries, a Division of A. F. Dormeyer CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1968

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API