The New York Times
The Washington Post
USA Today
San Jose Mercury News
CBS This Morning

998 Offers

NegotiationMost personal injury cases settle before ever reaching trial. Settlement is generally a good option for everyone involved. It is usually less expensive and much faster than courtroom litigation, and gives California’s overburdened court system a break. In California, a 998 offer is a cost-shifting mechanism to encourage settlement. Essentially, it means that if a settlement offer is made and rejected, the case goes to court, and the rejecting party fails to obtain a more favorable judgment in court, there is an effect on the payment of court costs.

Recovering Costs

California law provides that the prevailing party in a lawsuit is entitled to recover certain of the costs that he or she incurs during litigation. These costs include filing fees, jury fees, court reporter fees, and a few other costs. It does not include expenses such as attorney’s fees, expert witness fees, investigator’s fees, postage, or mileage.

998 Offers

998 offers are named after section 998 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. A 998 offer must:

  • Be a reasonable offer, made in good faith;
  • Be made no fewer than 10 days before the beginning of the trial;
  • Be served in writing upon the other party;
  • Specifically refer to section 998; and
  • Be rejected by the other party.

Rejection of an offer includes qualified acceptance. If the offeree party introduces additional terms, that constitutes a counteroffer, and the original offer is now off the table.

If a valid 998 offer is made and rejected, it has an effect on who pays costs from the time of the rejected offer. Costs, in this case, means court costs, expert witness costs, and a few other costs, but not attorney’s fees. The purpose of 998 offers is to encourage settlements, so that people do not frivolously and unnecessarily take cases to court.

Defense Offers


  • A defendant (alleged wrongdoer) makes a 998 settlement offer;
  • The plaintiff (injured party) rejects it;
  • The parties go to trial; and
  • The judgment at trial is less favorable to the plaintiff, meaning the plaintiff gets less money at trial than was offered in the settlement offer;

Then the plaintiff:

  • Is not entitled to recover the court costs that he or she would normally be entitled to; and
  • Must pay the defendant’s costs from the time of the rejected offer.

Additionally, the court, in its discretion, may order the plaintiff to pay a reasonable sum to cover the costs of experts used by the defendant in preparation and trial.

Plaintiff Offers


  • A plaintiff makes a 998 offer;
  • The defendant refuses it;
  • The parties go to trial; and
  • At trial, the judgment is less favorable to the defendant than the offer was;

Then, in addition to the court costs that the prevailing party is awarded, the court in its discretion may order the defendant to pay the plaintiff a reasonable sum to cover any expert witness expenses incurred after the date the offer was made. Additionally, the plaintiff may recover pre-judgment interest on the judgment, at a rate of 10 percent, beginning on date of plaintiff’s first 998 offer that is less than the judgment at trial.

If you have been injured because of another’s negligence or wrongdoing, please contact the skilled Monterey County personal injury attorneys at Corsiglia, McMahon & Allard, L.L.P. for a free consultation.

Client Reviews
I absolutely cannot speak highly enough of CMA Law, particularly of Mr. McMahon, with whom I have had the most experience. My entire family and I trusted CMA with our case following a significant and life-altering vehicle accident, and to say they delivered is putting it lightly. They were reachable & personable at every stage of this arduous, complex, and scary process, made things easier at every stage, inspired us with confidence, and delivered results. If you're looking for a law firm to place the trust of you in your family in, look absolutely no further than CMA - this is your firm. Declan O.
I suffered a severe spinal injury while working as a farm mechanic in the Salinas Valley. The attorneys -Tim McMahon and Mark Sigala were fantastic from the beginning. They fought for me over 3 long years and in the end, we won a difficult liability case against the farm company who was using dangerous equipment. The defendants in the case tried everything to put the blame on me and even claimed I was their employee in order to avoid civil responsibility. Tim and Mark never gave up on me and my case. I cannot recommend them highly enough. They are fighters. Adrian A.
Best Law Firms
American Board of Trial Advocates
2010 Street Fighter of The Year Award Finalists
Irish Legal 100
The Best Lawyers in America
Santa Clara County Bar
Super Lawyers
The National Trial Lawyers
California Lawyer
Top One
Santa Clara County Trial Lawyers Association
Public Justice Trial Lawyer of The Year