ROBERT E. PETTIS, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Anderson v. Hilton Hotels Corp., 202 So. 3d 846 (Fla. 2016)
  …851] district court disagreed, concluding that the term “PLAINTIFF” in Anderson’s offer could reasonably be interpreted to include both Anderson and his wife, Paula. The Fifth District relied on its earlier decision, Hibbard ex rel. Carr v. McGraw, 918 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005), for support. Hilton Hotels, 153 So. 3d at 416. In Hibbard, Amanda Carr was a minor who was involved in an automobile accident with Michael McGraw. Hilton, 153 So. 3d at 416. Carr’s mother, Faith Hib-bard, sued McGraw and. his em…
• Alamo Fin., L.P. v. Mazoff, 112 So. 3d 626 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)
  …haw Express, Inc. v. Hilyer Sod, Inc., 849 So. 2d 276, 278 (Fla.2003). “Because the offer of judgment statute and related rule must be strictly construed, virtually any proposal that is ambiguous is not enforceable.” Hibbard ex rel. Carr v. McGraw, 918 So. 2d 967, 971 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005). However, “given the nature of language, it may be impossible to [*629] eliminate all ambiguity” in a proposal for settlement. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Nichols, 932 So. 2d 1067, 1079 (Fla. 2006). “The rale does not…
• Stasio v. McMANAWAY, 936 So. 2d 676 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
  …construed because the offer of judgment statute and rule are in derogation of the common law rule that each party pay its own attorney’s fees. Willis Shaw Express, Inc. v. Hilyer Sod, Inc., 849 So. 2d 276 (Fla.2003); Hibbard ex rel. Carr v. McGraw, 918 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005). The purpose of rule 1.442 is to sanction a party who does not timely accept a settlement offer made prior to trial by shifting payment and recovery of costs after the offer is made. It is a punitive measure and should be constr…

Authorities Cited

• Yates v. State, 509 So. 2d 1249 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)