High court hears dispute over post-judgment interest after $20 million payment in Majestic Honda case

At oral argument in SJC-13651, counsel debated whether a post-judgment payment of roughly $20,000,000 satisfied the judgment and halted statutory post-judgment interest or whether the payment remained conditional because of released attachments and a remaining $3,000,000 the appellants said was still in dispute.

Richard Brianski, attorney for the appellant 849 South Washington Street LLC, told the court that the $20,000,000 wired directly to Majestic was “immediately available for their use” and carried no independent restriction or encumbrance at the time of payment. “As soon as that debt is paid ... the real estate attachment as a matter of law is gone,” Brianski said, arguing that the payment was unconditional and that the appellant had preserved its right to appeal.

Michael McDonough, counsel for the appellee H1 Lincoln d/b/a Majestic Honda, countered that the trial court properly fashioned a “balanced approach” by treating…