Nott

Nott v. Superior Court

Good Law
1988 Cal. App. LEXIS 899·204 Cal. App. 3d 1102·251 Cal. Rptr. 842
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 30, 1988No. C003754California2,440 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Blease, J.

In this writ proceeding we hold that an arbitration hearing is not a “trial,” as that term is used in Code of Civil Procedure section 998, subdivision (b)(3), 1 and accordingly conclude that the commencement of the hearing does not terminate an offer to enter a compromise judgment in a civil action. We will issue a peremptory writ directing the respondent court to enter judgment in favor of petitioner, Mary Nott, predicated upon her timely acceptance of an offer from real party in interest Sugar Bowl Corporation (Sugar Bowl).

Facts and Procedural Background

Nott commenced the underlying action against Sugar Bowl and Scott Harms alleging that she sustained injuries in a skiing accident when struck by Harms at a facility owned and operated by Sugar Bowl. On August 10, 1987, the case was scheduled for judicial arbitration to be held September 16. On August 31, Sugar Bowl served Nott with a written offer to settle the case for $3,501, pursuant to section 998. The matter proceeded to an arbitration hearing. Before the announcement of the arbitrator’s decision, Nott served and filed an acceptance of the Sugar Bowl offer. The acceptance was mailed to Sugar Bowl on September 25…

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.