Section 998: Defendants’ Section 998 Offer Requesting Indemnification (And, Implicitly, Defense) Of Unspecified Non-Parties Made The Offer Too Vague For Enforcement

That Conclusion Erased $5,360 Expert Witness Fees Award Against Plaintiffs And In Favor Of Defendants.

            In Khosravan v. Chevron Corp., Case No. B307482 (2d Dist., Div. 7 July 6, 2021) (published), the Chevron Defendants won a summary judgment against plaintiffs after sending an unaccepted CCP §998 offer to dismiss for a waiver of costs plus indemnifying Defendants against possible future indemnification claims by unspecified non-parties.  Ultimately, the lower court granted $5,360 in expert witness fees against the unsuccessful plaintiffs, with those limited fees being the subject of the appeal.  (Other imposed routine costs were not challenged.)  Plaintiffs claimed that the non-party indemnification 998 term was incapable of ascertainment so as to render the 998 offer vague, with the appellate court agreeing because of the vagaries of ascertaining the value of the claims, both for indemnification and litigation defense reimbursement purposes.  (See also Toste v. CalPortland Construction, 245 Cal.App.4^th 362, 373 n. 6 (2016).)  Given this vagueness of being able to delineate the value of the 998 offer, the expert witness fees were reversed as a matter of law.