Second District, Division 2 Rejects Suggestion Trial Court Cannot Award 998 Costs. This next one really involves a power challenge—can a trial court award postarbitration costs to a winning arbitration party based on a rejected Code of Civil Procedure section 998 offer? You betcha, ruled the appellate court in the next case we […]
Third District Finds Miller Rule Also Applies to Prevailing 998 Defendant. In Miller v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., 147 Cal.App.4th 451 (2007), the Third District Court of Appeal decided that the availability of expert witness costs in a Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA) action involving an injured railroad employee filed in state court
998 Offer Was Made After Plaintiff Received Medical Treatment; Third District Affirms $58,821.98 Costs Award Against Plaintiff. Timing is everything in judging the reasonableness of Code of Civil Procedure section 998 offers, as the next case shows. In Dutta v. Coker, Case No. C056023 (3d Dist. Sept. 28, 2009) (unpublished), plaintiff car passenger
Second District, Division 5 Finds Offer Was Made In Good Faith Under Abuse of Discretion Standard. Code of Civil Procedure section 998 offers can be tough and can completely shift the leverage in a particular case. Although the offers must be made in good faith, they must be evaluated carefully. The next one
Second District, Division 1 Finds Nothing Amiss About Substantial Costs Award. For those of you who follow us (whether more or less religiously), you know we have Categories on the left hand side of our home page. One of the Categories is “Section 998,” discussing the effect of Code of Civil Procedure section 998
First District, Division 3 Holds That 998 Offer Was Invalid, Requiring Plaintiffs To Conditionally Agree On Some Apportionment Between Themselves. Code of Civil Procedure section 998 offers require serious crafting to make sure they are valid. One of the cardinal rules is that, absent identical or indivisible interests among the offerees, the offer must
Unpublished Decision Faces Some Interesting Fee-Shifting Issues In ADA Case. Many of the California intermediate appellate unpublished decisions we examine have some very interesting legal issues for jurists to grapple with and resolve. The next one is no exception, containing some gnarly fee-shifting issues that involve Code of Civil Procedure section 998 (pretrial offer
Second District, Division 4 Rejects Plaintiff’s Protest to Cost Award, After Defense Prevailed and Recouped Expert Fees Through 998 Cost Shifting. Co-contributors Marc and Mike have litigated several cases (usually, fraud or nondisclosure cases) in which plaintiffs have attempted to recover damages for exposure to “toxic mold.” These cases are extremely expert intensive,
Second District, Division 6 Reinforces the Lesson in Workers’ Comp Lien Dispute. We have, on many occasions, discussed Code of Civil Procedure section 998, a fee-shifting statute based upon an offer of compromise. (See our category “Section 998” for more information on this area of the law.) Two of the things that must be
Third District Reaffirms Validity of Peterson in Unpublished Decision Involving Individual Plaintiff Who Could Compromise Both Personal and Representative Issues. In Van Alstyne v. Carter, Case No. C056440 (3d Dist. Apr. 14, 2009) (unpublished), plaintiff lost a crop damage case involving $1,200 in damages and an injunctive request after defendants defensed plaintiff through
