Legal Opinion
Kossman v. Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided September 19, 2000No. 96 C 8045Published
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
KEYS, United States Magistrate Judge.
Before the Court is Plaintiffs Motion in Aid of Execution of Judgment, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 69 and 28 U.S.C. § 1961 (West 2000). Plaintiff claims that Defendant owes him an additional $2,918.00 in post-judgment interest pursuant to the federal interest statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1961. Because granting Plaintiffs Motion would result in Plaintiff receiving a windfall and would not be consistent with the underlying purpose behind 28 U.S.C. § 1961, Plaintiffs Motion is denied.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
The dispute in this…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp. v. BonjornoSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Poleto v. Consolidated Rail Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987
- Carmelo Candiano v. Moore-Mccormack Lines, Inc. v. John W. McGrath Corp., Third PartyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1969
- Hassie Duran Howell v. Marmpegaso Compania Naviera, S. A., Third-Party J. P. Florio & Co., Inc., Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1978
- C.R. Bard, Inc. v. M3 Systems, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2000