No “Magic Language” of Acceptance Required.
From our own local Santa Ana appellate court, CCP § 998 jurisprudence gained an important case in the form of Puerta v. Torres, 195 Cal.App.4th 1267 (2011), which requires some provision to allow the offeree to indicate acceptance of the offer by signing a statement that the offer is accepted. Well, we now have a subsequent published opinion by the same court applying Puerta to a later situation invalidating a 998 offer, showing that the jurisprudential current does keep on swirling and is frequently fact specific in adding case law to the substantive area under consideration.
Rouland v. Pacific Specialty Ins. Co., Case No. G047919 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Oct. 7, 2013) (published) was a situation where a defendant insurer beat insureds’ landslide claim after a five-week jury, which also meant that insureds did not beat previously rejected 998 offers aggregating $125,000. Defendant filed a costs memorandum seeking $385,000 in costs from plaintiffs, $331,000 in expert witness fees--something 998 does allow for if it is triggered. The trial court found the defense 998 offer to be invalid based on a perception that the acceptance provisions were not good enough--both offers stated, “If you accept this offer, please file an Offer and Notice of Acceptance in the above-entitled action prior to trial or within thirty (30) days after the offer is made.”
That determination was reversed on appeal, in a 3-0 decision authored by Justice Aronson.
Although Puerta and its progeny require some semblance of acceptance language, no magic formula language is required. Section 998 and decisions on the acceptance requirement do not provide clear guidance on the subject, but nothing indicated that an acceptance line needed to be provided or that the Judicial Council form format had to be followed. (HINT, HINT--Maybe look at the Judicial Council form in crafting any offers, practitioners out there.) “Nothing in the statute’s language requires an offer to include either a line for the party to sign acknowledging its acceptance or any specific language stating the party shall accept the offer by signing an acceptance statement.” (Slip Opn., p. 8.)
Because the manner of acceptance was specified, the steps for completing were implicit even if they could have been made clearer -- that last part ours, but something the opinion implies.
Matter reversed and remanded to determine if the 998 offers were reasonable and claimed expert witness fees were reasonable.
Comments