Court Held That A Trial Court Erred In Omitting Post-Judgment Interest From A Breach Of Fiduciary Duty Judgment But Affirmed The Omission Of Pre-Judgment Interest

By David Fowler Johnson

In Kuers v. Shore, defendant was the trustee of a trust from 2016 to 2017, and he was then removed. No. 01-24-00098-CV, 2025 Tex. App. LEXIS 6124 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] August 14, 2025, no pet.). The successor trustee sued for breach of fiduciary duty, conversion, and declaratory and injunctive relief. The successor trustee requested prejudgment and post-judgment interest in her prayer for relief. The trial court awarded $4,725.00 in economic damages, but the final judgment did not include prejudgment or post-judgment interest, and the successor trustee appealed.

On appeal, the court noted that no statute authorizes prejudgment interest for breach-of-fiduciary-duty claims. The decision to award prejudgment interest is within the trial court’s discretion when no statute controls. Because the successor trustee failed to explain how the trial court abused its discretion or why equitable principles required prejudgment interest, the court affirmed the trial court’s decision to omit pre-judgment interest. Regarding post-judgment interest, the court noted that post-judgment interest is mandatory for every money judgment under the Texas Finance Code. The court reversed the trial court’s judgment to the extent it excluded post-judgment interest and remanded for calculation of post-judgment interest. The court affirmed the remainder of the judgment, including the denial of prejudgment interest.