New CA Civil Procedure Case (998 Offers)

  

 

 

 

I can help. I've been a California civil trial lawyer since 1980, a member of the American Board of Trial Advocates since 1995, and I've been listed in The Best Lawyers in America every year since 2012. I've represented both plaintiffs and defendants in business, insurance bad faith and coverage, personal injury, real property and wrongful death cases, I've recovered over $50 million for plaintiff clients, and obtained numerous defense verdicts and good settlements for defense clients. I've tried over 100 jury, court and administrative trials and arbitrations. For many years, I've provided mentoring to many less experienced lawyers in California.

 

Working with me, newer lawyers quickly develop the skills, strategies, and systems necessary to win their cases and build their dream law practice. How will it feel to be a successful and highly respected lawyer in your practice areas? Today is the day to start creating your future. 

 

Click the link to learn more about Master Lawyer Mentoring™, or email me at [email protected], or call me at (619) 990-4312.

 

To get my free summaries of the 22 new civil cases published by the California Supreme Court in 2022, click here.

Below is a discussion of a new CA civil case published last month.

Will You Beat a 998 Offer if You Later Settle for the Same Amount?

998 offers are often addressed by our California courts. Everyone knows you have to get a better result to get the benefits of a 998 offer. But what happens when a defendant serves a 998 offer, the plaintiff rejects it, and two years later on the day of trial the parties settle the case for the same amount as the 998 offer? Who is entitled to get the benefits of the 998 offer then? Last month, the Sixth District Court of Appeal published a new decision addressing this issue. To find out what they decided, watch the video and read my case summary below.

New CA Code of Civil Procedure Decision  

Chen v. BMW of North America (2023) _ Cal.App.5th _ , 2022 WL 18407504: The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s post-verdict order awarding plaintiff $53,509.51 in attorney fees and costs in his action alleging breach of warranty and violation of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (Civ. Code, § 1790, et seq.) and the Consumers Protection Act Legal Remedies Act (Civ. Code, § 1750, et seq.). During the litigation defendant sent a Code of Civil Procedure section 998 offer, agreeing to pay plaintiff $160,000 (exclusive of recoverable costs and attorney fees accrued to the date of the offer), and attorney fees and costs as awarded by the trial court. Plaintiff rejected the 998 offer, the litigation continued for two more years, and the parties settled on the day of trial with the settlement terms being essentially identical to the section 998 offer. The trial court properly concluded the 998 offer was valid, plaintiff did not do better than the offer, and properly limited the award of plaintiff’s fees and costs to $53,509.51, the fees and costs plaintiff accrued through July 2017, 45 days after the section 998 offer was made. (C.A. 6th, filed December 29, 2022, published January 23, 2023.)