California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Soliz v. City of Big Bear Lake, E067555 (Cal. App. 2019):
Hartline v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th 458, another case respondents rely on, also suggests that it may be in the offeree's best interest to clear up ambiguities with the offeror, but it did not hold that an offeree's failure to do so will render an unclear offer valid. There, the offeree believed that a section 998 offer included an appeal waiver, even though the offer contained no language "from which a waiver of appellate rights might be implied." (Hartline, supra, at p. 472.) In affirming the trial court's finding that the section 998 offer was made in good faithan issue distinct from whether the offer was sufficiently specificthe court stated that "the reasonable course of action" would have been to communicate with the offeror and make a counteroffer expressly reserving appellate rights. (Hartline, supra, at p. 472.) If the
Page 19
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.