The following blog entry is written to illustrate a common motion filed during civil litigation. Reviewing this kind of filing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.
(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this car accident lawsuit and its proceedings.)
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO TAX COSTS
THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 998 IS TO ENCOURAGE SETTLEMENTS AND TO PUNISH A PARTY WHO FAILS TO ACCEPT A REASONABLE OFFER FROM THE OTHER PARTY.
In Elrod v. Oregon Cummins Diesel, Inc. (1987) 195 C al.App.3rd 692, the court spent considerable time evaluating the purpose of Code of Civil Procedure section 998. The court noted as follows:
“Section 998 should be interpreted so as to effectuate its purpose of encouraging the settlement of lawsuits before trial.” Section 998 achieves its aim by punishing a party who fails to accept a reasonable offer from the other party. 195 Cal.App.3rd at 698-699.
In this case, the parties could have avoided an extremely expensive and time-consuming two-week jury trial had defendant and his insurance carrier accepted an entirely reasonable offer that is nearly half of what the jury ultimately awarded plaintiff.
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
By allowing defendant to the expense of calling expert witnesses to a trial they insisted upon, would be a windfall and would defeat the stated purpose of Section 998. Such conduct should not be rewarded, but in tact should be punished as the law provides. (See Part 3 of 5.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.