Legal News and Appellate Tips

In a hyper-formalistic holding in Mostafavi Law Group, APC v. Larry Rabineau, APC (D2d4 Mar. 3, 2021) No. B302344 (published), a judgment entered on an agreement under Code of Civil Procedure section 998 was vacated because the defendant's 998 offer did not include a signature line for the plaintiff to sign, even though the plaintiff signed it anyway. In a case of first impression, the Second District affirmed, holding a judgment may not be entered on a section 998 agreement in which the offer does not provide an acceptance provision.

I find this a very bizarre case. I would not be surprised if other District Courts of Appeal declined to follow it.

It is something I did not know, anyway: Plaintiff can still recover post-offer fees even if Plaintiff does not beat the 998 offer.  In Regueiro v. FCA US, LLC (2d Dist., Div. […]

If you are making or considering a CCP 998 offer in an employment case, note the current split of authority. In some cases, an employee making an unsuccessful overtime claim […]

Should you include attorney fees in your 998 offer? Or stay silent on them? That question came up this week, and this recent case suggests it is probably coming up […]

If you've been involved in litigation, you likely are aware of the "CCP 998 offer." CCP § 998 is a statutory carrot-and-stick...