UMNIIDTEDDL ES TDAISTTERS IDCITS TORFI FCLTO CROIDUART TAMPA DIVISION

C.W. ROBERTS CONTRACTING, INC.,

Claimant,

v. CASE NO. 8:25-cv-00459-SDM-AAS JOHNSON BROS. CORPORATION,

Respondent. ___________________________________/

ORDER After successfully moving (Doc. 17) to correct an arbitration award, claimant C.W. Roberts Contracting, Inc., moves (Doc. 19) for pre-judgment interest, post- judgment interest, and an attorney’s fee. Johnson Bros. Corporation responds. (Doc. 19.) The arbitrator ruled that “there is no prevailing party in this case” entitled to an attorney’s fee and that “the Arbitrator will not make an award of prejudgment inter- est.” (Doc. 1-5 at 6.) The claimant has identified no basis to disturb the arbitrator’s ruling. See Cook v. XL Specialty Ins. Co.,

(S.D. Fla. 2024). Of course, the claimant is entitled to post-judgment interest at the applicable federal statutory rate from the date of the entry of the judgment. Reinhart v. Asset Managing Group, Inc.,

, at *3 (M.D. Fla. 2018);

(a). The claimant’s motion (Doc. 19) is GRANTED-IN-PART and DENIED-IN- PART. The claimant is entitled to neither pre-judgment interest nor an attorney’s fee. The claimant is entitled to post-judgment interest at the rate of 3.65% per an- num.

. ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on November 25, 2025.

STEVEN D. MERRYDAY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-