Although the appellate court rejected plaintiff’s sole argument on review that future medicals should have been awarded, Hanamaikai v. Howard, Case No. H037346 (6th Dist. Oct. 24, 2012) (unpublished) is a sober reminder of how CCP § 998 is a potent costs-shifting provision in a case where attorney’s fees are not available to either side.
There, plaintiff won $39,954 in past economic loss (mainly medical expenses) from a jury in a low-speed auto collision case, with the trial court proposing an additur of $25,000 for past pain and suffering damages which the defense accepted. However, the trial judge did not increase for any future medical expenses, a determination sustained by the appellate court. However, here is the rub: the defense offered to settle under CCP § 998 for $101,000, an offer apparently rejected by plaintiff. That rejection had repercussions, with the defense obtaining a net positive judgment of $63,557.89 (i.e., $123,511.89 in defense costs minus the $59,954 in damages awarded to plaintiff). Ouch!