Saba

Saba v. Crater

Caution
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 207·62 Cal. App. 4th 150·72 Cal. Rptr. 2d 401·98 Daily Journal DAR 2628·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1895
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 16, 1998G018933California1,067 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rylaarsdam, J.

Defendant’s lawyer purported to make an oral offer to compromise pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 998 (all further statutory references are to the Code of Civil Procedure) on the record of a deposition. The offer was never reduced to writing; nonetheless, plaintiff attempted to accept the offer in writing and sought to have it enforced by the court. The trial court resolved a dispute concerning the terms of the offer, held that the offer and acceptance were valid and entered judgment. We reverse, holding that section 998 requires a written offer, and the section does not authorize the trial court summarily to resolve a dispute concerning the terms of the offer unless the offer and acceptance meet the requirements of section 664.6.

Facts

John Crater and Jerry Lehman contracted to acquire their partner Aftim K. Saba’s interest in the partnership. Subsequently, a dispute arose and Saba sued Crater and Lehman for fraud; Crater and Lehman cross-complained. The parties agreed certain issues in Saba’s complaint should be resolved by an accounting. The referee who conducted the accounting found that approximately $11,000 was owed to Saba under the contract.

Later,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.