Private Attorney General, Section 998: Plaintiff’s Jury Trial Win Almost Completely Absorbed By Successful Defense 998 Offer After Reduction For Post-Offer Expenses

Also, Plaintiff’s Suit Benefitted Herself, So No Section 1021.5 Fees Were Warranted.

               Nairobi v. Watkins, Case Nos. A164665 et al. (1^st Dist., Div. 3 Mar. 28, 2024) (unpublished) shows the potency of a successful defense CCP § 998 offer:  plaintiff’s $101,768.89 jury award got reduced to just $3,772.87.  The lower court also denied plaintiff’s CCP § 1021.5 fee request because the defense did not dispute needing to comply with an Oakland inhabitability municipal ordinance and plaintiff’s suit only sought money for herself alone.  The appellate court affirmed.  The trial judge’s calculation of what plaintiff won was no abuse of discretion because plaintiff failed to develop an adequate record, especially not including the special verdict to show how damages were allocated by jurors.  Also, the lower court’s conclusions on the 1021.5 fee request were justified.