Amends calculations of interest in civil actions a rate determined by average accepted auction price for last auction of 52 week U.S. treasury bills.
Summary
H5179 would change Rhode Island law governing interest added to money judgments in civil cases. Under current law, prejudgment and post-judgment interest in most civil actions are set at 12% per year. This bill would replace that fixed rate with a variable rate tied to the coupon issue yield equivalent of the average accepted auction price for the most recent 52-week U.S. Treasury bill auction settled before the lawsuit is filed. The bill keeps the existing framework that interest is added by the clerk to pecuniary damage awards and that post-judgment interest accrues on the judgment amount and prejudgment interest.
The bill also preserves a special rule for medical malpractice actions. For personal injury or wrongful death claims against specified health care providers based on professional negligence, the 12% rate would continue to apply, but interest would run from the earlier of written notice of the claim to the insurer or provider, or the filing of the lawsuit. The act would take effect immediately upon passage.
Impact
H5179 would amend Rhode Island General Laws § 9-21-10, altering how prejudgment and post-judgment interest are calculated in civil actions. The main legal effect is to move most civil judgments away from a fixed 12% interest rate and instead use a Treasury-bill-based benchmark, which would likely make interest rates fluctuate with market conditions. The bill would leave contractual interest provisions untouched and would preserve the existing medical malpractice interest rule for covered defendants and claims.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition from hearings or floor action. Based on the bill text and caption, the measure appears technical and policy-driven, aimed at updating interest calculations rather than changing substantive liability rules. The absence of recorded debate suggests sentiment cannot be reliably characterized beyond the bill’s neutral, administrative nature.
Contention
The likely point of contention is the choice to replace a fixed 12% interest rate with a market-based Treasury bill rate for most civil cases. Supporters may view this as a modernization that better tracks prevailing interest rates, while opponents may argue it reduces the incentive to settle or diminishes compensation for delayed payment when market rates are low. Another possible issue is the bill’s decision to preserve the higher 12% rate for medical malpractice cases, which could be seen as maintaining a special rule for one category of defendants while changing the rule for others.