Cited by

¶24 In this case, the “indebtedness” is the promissory note, and the parties agreed therein the debt would “bear no interest.” See Metzler v. BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of L.A., Inc., ¶ 19 (2014).

¶ 22 (2014) (comparing interest on interest with compound interest).

P. 68(g)(2); Metzler v. BCI Coca- Cola Bottling Co. of L.A., Inc., ¶ 20 (2014).

A loan is “money lent at interest,” and an indebtedness is “something (as an amount of money) that is owed.” Metzler v. BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Los Angeles, Inc., ¶ 19 (2014) (quoting Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary 612, 700 (1983)).

Metzler v. BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of L.A., Inc., -47, ¶ 25 (2014) (holding prejudgment interest was due on judgment filed after the effective date of the statute).

While we acknowledge that awarding prejudgment interest on unliquidated claims is inconsistent with Arizona's general rule, see Metzler v. BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Co. , , 144, (under common law, "prejudgment interest is generally not awardable on unliquidated claims"), we must apply the given statutory language.

See Metzler v. BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of L.A., Inc., -45 ¶ 13 (2014) (statute’s language controls “unless an absurdity or constitutional violation results”).

We do not find that to be the case here, especially given our duty “to harmonize, whenever possible, related statutory and rule provisions.” ¶ 13 (2014) ( ¶ 7 (2007)).

We do not find that to be the case here, especially given our duty “to harmonize, whenever possible, related statutory and rule provisions.” ¶ 13 , ( ¶7 , ).

Plan, ¶ 38 (2016); ¶ 13 (2014).

§ 44- 1201(B), which became effective on July 20, 2011.5 See Metzler v. BCI Coca- Cola Bottling Co. of Los Angeles, Inc., ¶ 15 (2014).

144 ¶ 11, (citation and quotation marks omitted).

Metzler v. BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Los Angeles, Inc., ¶ 13 (2014).

But if the text is ambiguous, we also consider the statute’s context; its subject matter, and historical background; its effects and consequences; and its spirit and purpose,” Metzler v. BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Los Angeles, Inc. , 144-45 ¶ 13, -47 (2014) (citations and internal quotations omitted).

§ 44-1201(B); Metzler v. BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Los Angeles, Inc., ¶ 1, (noting that the interest rate under subsection (B) is 4.25%).

Subsection A applies to interest owed “on any loan, indebtedness or other obligation” or “on any judgment based on a written agreement evidencing a loan, indebtedness or obligation.” Subsection B applies to any judgment “[u]nless specifically provided for in a statute or a different rate is contracted for in wilting.” ¶ 35 In Metzler v. BCI Cocar-Cola Bottling Co. of Los Angeles, Inc., ¶¶ 21-23 , our supreme court construed “or other obligation” in § 44-1201(A) narrowly, holding that because a s

¶ 13 (2014) ("If the statute's language is clear, it controls unless an absurdity or constitutional violation results.") (quotation omitted).

§ 44-1201(B) applies to judgments entered after July 20, 2011); Metzler v. BCI Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Los Angeles, Inc., ¶¶ 19–20, (explaining that the obligation to pay prejudgment interest does not arise until the judgment is entered “even though the time frame for which prejudgment interest is owed obviously predates the judgment”).