Cases: Section 998

Requests For Admission, Section 998: In Automobile Collision Case, CCP § 998 Offer Was Not Invalid For Requiring Consent By Defense Insurer Carriers, And Costs Of Proof Sanctions Properly Denied To Plaintiff

Cases: Requests for Admission, Cases: Section 998

However, The Reasonableness Of The 998 Offer—Not Ruled On By The Lower Court—Had To Be Revisited On Remand. Matthews v. Ryan, Case Nos. B335736 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 28, 2026) (partially published; 998 discussion published, but costs of proof sanctions discussion not published) has two good discussions, one on 998 offers which […]

Section 998: Assignee Mother Of Claims Bound Her Assignor Son To Acceptance Of A 998 Offer Such That Son Could Not Bring Another Suit Against 998 Offeror

Cases: Section 998

Lack Of Standing And Res Judicata Drove The Conclusion That The Acceptance Was Final On The Dispute. Burke v. Benworth Capital Partners, LLC, Case No. G064478 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Jan. 26, 2026) (unpublished) is an interesting case which confirms that an accepted and paid CCP § 998 offer by an assignee will divest the

Insurance, Section 998:  Insurance Concerns Of Carriers, Although A Consideration, Are Not Ones Which Should Lead A Litigant To Reject A Section 998 Offer Outright

Cases: Insurance, Cases: Section 998

Carriers Can Protect Themselves, With the Offeree Needing To Press A Carrier To Help Accept A Good Faith 998 Offer. Insurance considerations are very important at all stages of a case, including mediation.  But they are no less crucial in evaluation of CCP § 998 offers, as the next case shows, because they can result

Costs, Prevailing Party, Section 998, Section 1717:  Attorney’s Fees Properly Denied To Plaintiffs Where Neither Side Prevailed Even Though Both Sides Did Bring “On The Contract” Claims

Cases: Costs, Cases: Prevailing Party, Cases: Section 1717, Cases: Section 998

However, Denial Of Costs Awards Were Reversed Based On Improper CCP § 998 Focus; Defendants Being The Costs Prevailing Parties When No One Won; And Errors In Adopting Across-The-Board Reductions For Jointly Represented Parties. Golunova v. Akhromtsev, Case Nos. A167542 et al. (1st Dist., Div. 4 Nov. 20, 2025) (unpublished) involved dueling complaints by members

Section 998:  November 2025 Orange County Lawyer Article Surveys The Impact Of K.M. v. Grossmont Union

Cases: Section 998

Message Is “Clarity Is King” In Framing These Offers, Especially Where A Civil Code Section 1542 Release Is Desired By The Offeror.  Rachel E. Lustig, in an article appearing in the November 2025 Orange County Lawyer at pages 46-47entitled “Avoiding The Pitfalls:  What K.M. v. Grossmont Union Teaches About Drafting Enforceable Section 998 Offers,” discusses

Section 998: 4/1 DCA, Relying On Its Zavala Decision Under Review By The California Supreme Court, Reverses A Lower Court’s Failure To Independently Evaluate Whether A Lump-Sum § 998 Offer Served To Shift Costs And Fees In A Lemon Law Suit

Cases: Section 998

The Result Was That Car Manufacturer’s Request For Costs Had To Be Revisited And The $200,000 Fee Award To Plaintiffs Had To Be Reevaluated.                In Zavala v. Hyundai Motor America, 107 Cal.App.5th 458, 463 (2024), rev. granted, No. S289000 (March 19, 2025), the 4/1 DCA concluded that CCP § 998 offers may include simultaneous,

POOF!, Section 998: Make Sure Your 998 Offers Are Not Ambiguous And Only Targeted For Claim In the Lawsuit, With The Defense Losing A $231,458.30 Award On The Offer

Cases: POOF!, Cases: Section 998

If You Include Language Like “Or Could Have Been Brought,” This Might Well Be Invalidating For An Offer—Drafting Tip to All!                Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. v. Enchante Accessories, Inc., Case No. B337902 (2d Dist., Div. 4 July 25, 2025) (unpublished) is an excellent reminder of how to structure CCP § 998 offers with releases

Request For Admissions, Section 998: Prevailing Defendants Entitled To $108,000 In Costs-Shifting Under Section 998 And $39,140 For RFA Unreasonable Denials

Cases: Requests for Admission, Cases: Section 998

Opinion Shows How Substantial Expenses Can Be Shifted.                Doe v. Accor Hotels & Resorts, LLC, Case No. A167247 et al. (1st Dist., Div. 3 July 21, 2025) (unpublished, posted on July 22, 2025) was where a prevailing defendant group won $108,000 based on a successful CCP § 998 offer and $39,140 (out of a

Section 998: Defendants Held Jointly And Severally Liable Did Not Beat Jury Verdict So As To Escape Costs Under Section 998

Cases: Section 998

No Non-Economic Damages Were Sought In Vehicle Property Injury Case, So Appealing Defendants Did Not Fashion A Successful 998 Offer.                Defendants were held jointly and severally liable in a vehicle property injury matter where plaintiff recovered a $204,528 jury verdict damages award as against them and others, based on damages to plaintiff’s truck and

Section 998: Cross-Defendant’s 998 Offer Was Invalid, So It Did Not Dilute Recovery By Defendant/Cross-Complainant On Other Defense Claims

Cases: Section 998

Be Careful What You Put In Your 998 Offers, Don’t Overreach.                In T&R Painting and Drywall v. Town Building & Development, Case Nos. B330375 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 6 June 17, 2025) (unpublished), there was a convoluted dispute between a plaintiff subcontractor and a defendant general contractor, with general contractor bringing a cross-complaint

Scroll to Top