This Means The Lower Court Needed To Honor the $350,000 Accepted Offer And Enter Judgment Thereon. In Chiu v. Wu, Case No. H050642 (6th Dist. Mar. 6, 2024) (unpublished), Plaintiffs accepted defendant’s $350,000 CCP § 998 offer calling for dismissal of action with prejudice, not entry of a judgment. After some procedural gaffes (including […]
Costs Award Of $484,834.16 Affirmed On Appeal, Mainly Expert Witness Fees. CCP § 998 can be a game changer, as Oshodin v. Fire Ins. Exchange, Case No. B319043 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Feb. 29, 2024) (unpublished) demonstrates. What happened here was that plaintiff rejected a 998 offer for $25,000, although they had a $1
However, Majority And Dissenting Justices Disagreed On Whether Section 998 Applied To A Litigation Ended Through A Settlement. Ayers v. FCA US, LLC, Case No. B315884 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Feb. 27, 2024) (published) is an interesting decision involving the interplay between the Song-Beverly Act “lemon law” fee/costs shifting provisions and pretrial offers under
Section 998 Offer Was Proper, So Expert Witness Expenses Properly Awarded. In Tayefeh v. Kern Medical Center, Case No. F085746 (5th Dist. Jan. 29, 2024) (unpublished), the lower court and appellate courts affirmed certain costs for prevailing defendants for certain out-of-state deposition expenses and expert witness costs. Those determinations were affirmed on appeal. Because
In The End, Only $10,000 In Fees Awarded Against Employer. This next case addresses many issues we have posted on over the years—specificity in CCP § 998 offers and seeking reasonable fees on claims which should be allocated but are not. Wu v. ABC Lucky Transportation, Inc., Case Nos. B323494/B326800 (2d Dist., Div. 1
Opinion Illustrates How Valid Section 998 Offer Can Reduce Fee Exposure Under A Fee Shifting Statute. On December 31, 2023, we posted on Kinney v. City of Corona, Case No. E079840, which was unpublished at the time. We can now report that Kinney was certified for publication on January 24, 2024. It demonstrates how
. . . However, Fee Award Had To Be Reduced Down To $2,475 Based on Successful Defense § 988 Offer With Respect To Post-Offer Fees. On appeal, you win some, you lose some, or the appellate court modifies judgments in varying amounts. That third result is what occurred in Kinney v. City of Corona,
Remands Were In Order Because Costs Of Proof Sanctions Were Not Properly Tethered To The Proof Of The Matters Denied And Defense Section 998 Offer Impact Should Not Have Been Held In Abeyance Pending Appeal Well, now that we are past the Thanksgiving holidays, the defense must be giving thanks for the results in
Bottom Line Is That Some Routine Costs May Have To Be Paid On Remand By Prevailing Defendant. Hussein v. Razin, Case Nos. G061491/G061681 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Nov. 13, 2023) (unpublished) is a decades-long dispute which finally resulted in plaintiff failing to prove his claims, in plaintiff defeating cross-claims against the defendant/cross-complainant, and with
Playing Cute With Business Records Admissibility Issues Might Lead To RFA Sanctions. In Vargas v. Gallizzi, Case No. B317540 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Oct. 13, 2023) (published), personal injury plaintiffs prevailed against defendant but only obtained jury verdicts amounting to $30,000 based on a prior appeal and subsequent jury verdict. But that then led
