Section 998: Costs Were Properly Assessed Under 998 Offer Because The Release Was Limited And No Authority Showed A Good Faith Settlement Determination Rendered The Offer Invalid

$4,613.61 Costs Hit, After Adjustment For Damages Award, Was The Net Result.

            In Neff v. Anderson, Case No. B306263 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Mar. 24, 2021) (unpublished), plaintiffs challenged a $4,613.61 costs award based on a CCP § 998 offer by defendant RE/MAX.  The underlying case concerned damages to plaintiffs’ personal property which was removed from their home or destroyed when being placed in a trailer and open boat parked outside their home after a foreclosure.  Plaintiffs received a jury verdict against the property caretaker and RE/MAX, after apportioning fault among various parties.  However, before the jury verdict, RE/MAX submitted a section 998 offer to Plaintiffs in the amount of $27,501 in exchange for a dismissal of the action and mutual release and subject to a good faith determination by the court.  The trial court, after some adjustments, awarded $4,613.61 in costs based on the premise the section 998 offer was valid.

            Plaintiffs’ appeal of the cost award was unsuccessful.  A fair construction of the 998 offer was that the mutual releases were hinged to the claims in the suit, not releases of other claims which could invalidate a section 998 offer.  (The attached settlement agreement narrowly applied to named RE/MAX parties and only related to claims in “this action,” certainly narrow enough on the claims and with boilerplate releases of affiliated parties of RE/MAX not invalidating the offer.)  With respect to the good faith settlement issue, “[Neff] cites no authority for the rule that a good faith finding by the court renders an offer to compromise a mere settlement offer.”  (Slip Opn., pp. 6-7.)   Costs award affirmed on appeal.

Scroll to Top