Vermont: Prejudgment Interest Rules
The short answer
Yes, through case law rather than a dedicated statute. Vermont Rule of Civil Procedure 54(a) says a judgment includes prejudgment interest, and Vermont's courts have built the actual rule around a single test that applies to contract and tort claims alike: interest is available as of right whenever damages are liquidated or readily ascertainable (a medical bill with a known cost and date, a fixed contract debt), and left to the trial court's discretion for everything else, if needed to fully compensate the plaintiff. The rate is a flat 12% a year, the same figure Vermont uses for its general legal rate of interest and for postjudgment interest. Interest on each element of loss runs from the date that particular loss was actually incurred, not necessarily from a single injury or breach date.
| Governing law | Vermont has no dedicated prejudgment-interest statute. Instead, Vermont Rule of Civil Procedure 54(a) states that the amount of a judgment includes prejudgment interest and costs, and the Vermont Supreme Court has built a body of case law defining when that interest is available and how much. The actual rate comes from a separate, general-purpose statute, 9 V.S.A. § 41a(a) -- the state's general 'legal rate of interest' -- which courts (including a federal court applying Vermont law) have confirmed supplies both the pre- and postjudgment rate; 12 V.S.A. § 2903(c) cross-references the same rate for a judgment lien |
|---|---|
| Interest rate | A single flat rate for everything: 12% a year, computed by the actuarial method, under 9 V.S.A. § 41a(a) -- 'the rate of interest ... shall be 12 percent per annum.' Vermont courts apply this same 12% figure to a prejudgment interest award whether the underlying claim is contract or tort, with no separate rate track for either |
| When interest starts running | Runs from the date each element of loss was actually incurred, not necessarily from a single fixed injury or breach date. For special damages made up of several distinct items (medical bills, for example), interest on each item runs from the date that particular expense was incurred -- because 'its cost and date was known precisely' at that point -- not from an earlier date like the date of the underlying accident; a federal court applying Vermont law rejected a request to run interest on all medical bills from the date of injury instead of each bill's own date. For damages a court chooses to award interest on in its discretion, the trigger is whatever date the court finds necessary to make the plaintiff whole |
| Contract vs. tort claims | Vermont doesn't split this by claim type into separate statutes or rates -- one case-law framework covers both. Interest is available as of right (mandatory) whenever damages are 'liquidated or readily ascertainable at the time of the tort,' squarely covering an easily-quantified item of tort damages (a medical bill) exactly the same way it covers a liquidated contract debt. Damages that aren't liquidated or readily ascertainable -- typically non-economic tort damages like pain and suffering, but potentially some contract damages too -- fall to the same discretionary standard instead: the trial court may still add interest if doing so is 'required to make the plaintiff whole.' The Vermont Supreme Court has also held that the presence of an unliquidated counterclaim doesn't defeat an otherwise-available prejudgment interest award |
| Mandatory or discretionary | A genuine two-track system that turns on whether the damages are liquidated or ascertainable, not on claim type. Liquidated or readily ascertainable damages draw interest as of right -- the rationale being that a defendant could always have avoided the interest simply by tendering the known, calculable amount. Everything else is discretionary, left to the trial court's judgment about what's needed to fully compensate the plaintiff; a court can and does decline discretionary interest on an uncertain damages category (like pain and suffering) even while awarding interest as of right on the same plaintiff's liquidated medical-expense damages in the same case |
| Simple or compound | No Vermont statute or case located by this survey specifically addresses whether the 12% figure compounds for the prejudgment period. 9 V.S.A. § 41a(a) specifies the rate is 'computed by the actuarial method,' a calculation method the same statute defines in more technical detail, but this survey did not confirm whether that method compounds interest over the prejudgment period itself -- noted as an open question rather than assumed |
| Claims against the government | Vermont's Tort Claims Act, 12 V.S.A. § 5601, waives the State's sovereign immunity for an employee's negligent or wrongful act within the scope of employment, treating the State 'under the same circumstances, in the same manner, and to the same extent as a private person would be liable' -- but caps total State liability at $500,000 to any one person and $2,000,000 in the aggregate per occurrence, and carves out several categories entirely (a discretionary-function act, tax assessment or collection, quarantine, National Guard activities, and intentional torts like assault, battery, or fraud, among others). This survey found no case or statute addressing whether prejudgment interest counts inside or outside the $500,000/$2,000,000 cap, or any interest rule distinct from the ordinary private-party rules described above |
| Other exceptions | Vermont's own case-law framework is itself the main limit: damages that are neither liquidated nor readily ascertainable draw no prejudgment interest at all unless the trial court affirmatively exercises its discretion to add it, meaning the default for a genuinely uncertain damages category (pain and suffering, for instance) is no interest, not automatic interest. Separately, Vermont has a narrower, distinct statute for one specific contract context -- the Prompt Payment Act, 9 V.S.A. § 4007(b), covering construction-contract payment disputes -- which the Vermont Supreme Court has held is a legally distinct remedy from ordinary prejudgment interest, even though both currently accrue at the same 1%-per-month rate; that narrower statute is outside the general prejudgment interest rule covered here |
Compare this rule across all 50 states + DC →
The short answer
Vermont doesn't have a dedicated prejudgment-interest statute -- the right comes from a court rule and a line of Vermont Supreme Court cases instead. Vermont Rule of Civil Procedure 54(a) simply says a judgment includes prejudgment interest, and the courts have filled in the details with a single test that applies equally to contract and tort claims: interest is available as of right whenever the damages are liquidated or readily ascertainable -- a medical bill with a known cost and date, a fixed contract debt -- and left to the trial court's discretion for everything else, awarded only if necessary to make the plaintiff whole. The rate is a flat 12% a year, the same figure Vermont uses generally for its legal rate of interest and for interest after judgment. And interest on each separate item of loss runs from the date that particular loss was actually incurred, not necessarily from a single date like the date of the underlying accident.
Requirements one by one
Governing law
There's no comprehensive prejudgment-interest statute in Vermont. The starting point is procedural: Vermont Rule of Civil Procedure 54(a) provides that the amount of a judgment includes prejudgment interest and costs. The substance of the rule -- when prejudgment interest is available, and how much -- comes entirely from Vermont Supreme Court case law built up over decades. The actual numeric rate, though, does come from a statute: 9 V.S.A. § 41a(a), Vermont's general "legal rate of interest" provision, which courts (including a federal court applying Vermont law in a recent personal-injury case) have confirmed supplies the rate for a prejudgment award, not just for ordinary loans or postjudgment interest.
Interest rate
One flat rate covers everything: 12% a year, computed by the actuarial method, under 9 V.S.A. § 41a(a). This is the same rate Vermont applies generally when no other statute specifies a different one, and the same rate used for interest after judgment -- Vermont doesn't distinguish a prejudgment rate from a postjudgment rate, or a contract rate from a tort rate.
When interest starts running
Vermont's rule is more granular than a single accrual date for the whole case: interest on each element of loss runs from the date that particular loss was actually incurred. For a personal-injury claim with a series of medical bills, that means interest on each bill runs from the date that specific expense was incurred -- because its cost and date were known precisely at that point -- not from an earlier date like the date of the accident itself. A federal court applying Vermont law made this explicit, rejecting a plaintiff's request to calculate interest on all of his medical expenses starting from the date of his fall, and instead calculating interest bill by bill from each expense's own date. For a damages category a court chooses to award interest on in its discretion, the starting date is whatever the court finds necessary to make the plaintiff whole.
Contract vs. tort claims
Vermont doesn't split this into separate statutes or rates for contract versus tort -- one case-law framework governs both. The dividing line that actually matters is whether the damages are liquidated or readily ascertainable, a distinction that cuts across claim type: an easily-quantified item of tort damages (a medical bill with a fixed cost) is treated exactly like a liquidated contract debt, drawing interest as of right. A non-economic or otherwise uncertain damages category -- most often pain and suffering in a tort case, but potentially an unliquidated contract claim too -- falls instead to the trial court's discretion, awarded only if necessary to fully compensate the plaintiff. Vermont's Supreme Court has also confirmed that having an unliquidated counterclaim in the same case doesn't defeat an otherwise-available prejudgment interest award on the main claim.
Mandatory or discretionary
A genuine two-track system, but the line is drawn by whether the damages are liquidated or ascertainable, not by claim type. Liquidated or readily ascertainable damages draw prejudgment interest as of right -- the rationale being that a defendant could always have avoided the interest simply by paying the known, calculable amount instead of contesting it. Everything else is discretionary: the trial court decides, based on what's needed to fully compensate the plaintiff, whether to add interest at all. In practice, a court can and does award interest as of right on a plaintiff's liquidated medical-expense damages while, in the very same case, declining to award any discretionary interest on that same plaintiff's pain-and-suffering damages.
Simple or compound
No Vermont statute or case located by this survey specifically addresses whether the 12% rate compounds for the prejudgment period. § 41a(a) does say the rate is "computed by the actuarial method" -- a calculation method defined in more technical detail elsewhere in the same statute -- but this survey did not confirm whether that method results in compounding over the prejudgment period specifically, so this is left as an open question rather than assumed either way.
Claims against the government
Vermont's Tort Claims Act, 12 V.S.A. § 5601, waives the State's sovereign immunity for an employee's negligent or wrongful act committed within the scope of employment, treating the State "under the same circumstances, in the same manner, and to the same extent as a private person would be liable." But it caps the State's total liability at $500,000 to any one person and $2,000,000 in the aggregate for all persons arising from a single occurrence, and it carves out several categories entirely -- a discretionary-function act, tax assessment or collection, quarantine impositions, National Guard activities, and intentional torts like assault, battery, or fraud, among others. This survey found no case or statute addressing whether prejudgment interest counts inside or outside that dollar cap, or any interest rule for a Vermont government defendant that differs from the ordinary rules described above.
Other exceptions
The biggest limit built into Vermont's own case-law framework is the flip side of the mandatory/discretionary rule: damages that are neither liquidated nor readily ascertainable draw no prejudgment interest at all unless a court affirmatively decides to add it. The default for something genuinely uncertain, like pain and suffering, is no interest -- not automatic interest that a defendant has to argue against. Separately, Vermont has an entirely distinct statute for one specific context -- the Prompt Payment Act, 9 V.S.A. § 4007(b), covering payment disputes on construction contracts -- which the Vermont Supreme Court has expressly warned should not be conflated with ordinary prejudgment interest, even though the two currently happen to accrue at the same 1%-per-month rate; that narrower statute sits outside the general prejudgment interest rule covered on this page.
What trips people up
The most common mistake is assuming Vermont's prejudgment interest works like a single up-front, all-or-nothing determination. It doesn't -- a personal-injury case can end up with interest running from several different dates for several different categories of damages: each medical bill from its own date, other liquidated items from when they became fixed, and no interest at all on pain and suffering unless the court specifically decides to add it.
The second trap is assuming any tort claim automatically gets the same treatment as an ordinary contract debt. Vermont's rule doesn't care about the contract/tort label -- it cares whether the specific damages at issue were liquidated or readily ascertainable at the relevant time. A tort claim built entirely around hard, dated bills can draw interest as of right, while a contract claim for genuinely uncertain damages might not.
Common questions
What's Vermont's prejudgment interest rate?
A flat 12% a year, under 9 V.S.A. § 41a(a) -- the same figure Vermont uses as its general legal rate and for postjudgment interest.
Do I get prejudgment interest automatically on my personal injury damages in Vermont?
It depends on the type of damages. Liquidated or readily ascertainable items, like medical bills with a known cost and date, draw interest as of right. Pain and suffering and other uncertain damages are left to the court's discretion, and a court can decline to add interest on them even while awarding it on your other damages.
When does interest start running on my medical bills in Vermont?
From the date each bill was actually incurred, not from the date of your accident -- Vermont courts calculate interest bill by bill.
Can I get prejudgment interest if I sue the State of Vermont?
Possibly, subject to the Vermont Tort Claims Act's $500,000-per-person, $2,000,000-per-occurrence cap and its list of carved-out claim types (discretionary-function acts, certain intentional torts, and others). This survey found no case addressing whether prejudgment interest itself counts inside or outside that dollar cap.
Statutes and sources
- 9 V.S.A. § 41a(a) -- "Except as specifically provided by law, the rate of interest or the sum allowed for forbearance or use of money shall be 12 percent per annum computed by the actuarial method." Accessed 2026-07-05: https://law.justia.com/codes/vermont/title-9/chapter-4/section-41a/
- 12 V.S.A. § 5601(a)-(b) -- "The State of Vermont shall be liable for injury to persons or property or loss of life caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of an employee of the State while acting within the scope of employment, under the same circumstances, in the same manner, and to the same extent as a private person would be liable to the claimant... Effective July 1, 2011, the maximum liability of the State under this section shall be $500,000.00 to any one person and the maximum aggregate liability shall be $2,000,000.00 to all persons arising out of each occurrence." Accessed 2026-07-05: https://law.justia.com/codes/vermont/title-12/chapter-189/section-5601/
Source links
Every statute quoted above, linked, with the date we checked it.