Nelson v. Erickson

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court considered whether a defendant improved his position at trial after requesting a trial de novo from mandatory arbitration. The court interpreted a settlement offer of "$26,000 plus taxable costs incurred at arbitration" as $26,000 plus the known arbitration costs of $1,522, applying an ordinary-person standard. Because the trial award was less than that settlement amount, the defendant improved his position and was not liable for the plaintiff's attorney fees under MAR 7.3.

Holdings

1. A settlement offer stating "$26,000 plus taxable costs incurred at arbitration" must be interpreted as $26,000 plus the known arbitration costs of $1,522.
2. Erickson improved his position at trial because the $27,167 trial award was less than the $27,522 settlement offer.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Erickson improved his position at trial for purposes of MAR 7.3 when the pretrial settlement offer was "$26,000 plus taxable costs incurred at arbitration."
2. How a settlement offer containing a specific amount plus known arbitration costs should be interpreted when determining entitlement to attorney fees after a trial de novo.

Disposition

affirmed