Legal Opinion
Barella v. Exchange Bank
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 3, 2000No. A088938PublishedCited by 50 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
RIVERA, J. *
In this case we decide whether a plaintiff suing for defamation can be put at risk for payment of a defendant’s costs pursuant to section 998 of the Code of Civil Procedure, if the defendant makes a reasonable settlement offer but attaches to it a condition of confidentiality. In other words, must a plaintiff seeking to vindicate his good name (and to recover damages for its tamishment) reject a generous—but secret—settlement at his peril?
Consistent with the ancient proverb that “A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches” (Proverbs 22: l), 1 we hold that a…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Rosenblatt v. BaerSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Poster v. Southern California Rapid Transit DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
- Goodstein v. Bank of San PedroCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- Wilson v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1999
- Elrod v. Oregon Cummins Diesel, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1987
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by50 opinions
- Fassberg Construction Co. v. Housing AuthorityCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Persson v. Smart Inventions, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2005
- Berg v. DardenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Nelson v. Pearson Ford Co.California Court of Appeal · 2010
- Markow v. RosnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.