Legal Opinion

Short v. Petty

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided July 27, 2006No. 1 CA-CV 05-0471PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BARKER, Judge.

¶ 1 Defendants made a joint offer of judgment under Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 68 (“Rule 68”) to plaintiffs, a husband and wife. The wife’s claim was for personal injuries and her husband had a derivative claim for loss of consortium. Plaintiffs rejected the joint offer of $100,000 and recovered only $20,000 in a joint verdict. The trial court refused to impose sanctions and found that a joint offer of judgment must be apportioned to comply with Rule 68. For the reasons that follow, we find apportionment unnecessary in this case and reverse the judgment of the trial…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Marek v. ChesnySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. John's Heating Service v. LambAlaska Supreme Court · 2002
  3. North Valley Emergency, Specialists, L.L.C. v. SantanaArizona Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Pima County v. Pima County Law Enforcement Merit System CouncilArizona Supreme Court · 2005
  5. RTTC Communications, LLC v. Saratoga Flier, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 2005

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Scottsdale Insurance v. TolliverDistrict Court, N.D. Oklahoma · 2009

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API