LESTER F. DOUGLAS, APPELLANT,
v.
ASHWAN GANATRA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the trial court erred in awarding additional costs beyond the settlement amount because the offer and acceptance were clear and inclusive of all costs.
[1] A settlement offer made pursuant to section 768.79, Florida Statutes, which states a total amount, is construed as including all damages, taxable costs, attorney's fees,…
[2] A trial court errs by awarding costs incurred during the "offer window" when the parties have agreed to a total settlement amount that explicitly includes all taxable cos…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellee offered to settle a personal injury claim for a total amount pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 768.79. Appellant accepted this offer. Appellee later s…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Settlement Agreement Construction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellee sued appellant for personal injuries. The parties engaged in settlement discussions and on October 27, 1993, appellee tendered an offer of settlement via fax and mail, which was expressly made pursuant to section 768.79, Florida Statutes. The offer stated that appellee would settle the case with appellant in the “total” amount of $12,-500, inclusive of all taxable costs against defendant accrued to date.
Appellant issued a notice of acceptance of appellee’s offer on November 19, 1993, pursuant to the above statute, which provided that appellant “hereby gives notice of accepting Plaintiffs offer of settlement in the total amount of Twelve Thousand Five Hundred and No/100 ($12,500.00) Dollars, inclusive of all taxable costs, attorney’s fees and interest.”
After receipt of the settlement funds, appellee moved to tax additional costs incurred from the date of the service of the offer of settlement. The trial court entered final judgment for the amount of the offer plus costs incurred during the “offer window,” i.e., those incurred after the offer was tendered but prior to its acceptance. Such award for costs was erroneous.
Section 768.79, Florida Statutes (1991), reads in pertinent part:
(2) The making of an offer of settlement which is not accepted does not preclude the making of a subsequent offer. An offer must:
(a) Be in writing and state that it is being made pursuant to this section.
(b) Name the party making it and the party to whom it is being made.
(c) State with particularity the amount offered to settle a claim for punitive damages, if any.
(d) State its total amount.
The offer shall be construed as including all damages which may be awarded in a final judgment.
(Emphasis added).
The offer and acceptance in this case were both certain in reciting the total amount. Accordingly, there was no ambiguity, uncer tainty or other reason for the trial court to consider changing the bargain made by the parties; therefore, we reverse and remand.
GLICKSTEIN, FARMER and KLEIN, JJ., concur.