Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Success Stories of Personal Injury Lawyers Directory US Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Canada Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Resource Directory
Search Lawyers by Zip Code
facebook.com/injury.usa

  to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.

Gurganus v. Cartwright

12/31/2002

g and amount of the parties' settlement offers both prior to and throughout the litigation. Although Defendant avers the trial court refused to consider her insurer's $6,720.00 settlement offer on the ground that it was not a formal offer of judgment under Rule 68, the trial court's written findings contradict her claim. The trial court found Defendant's insurer made a $6,720.00 settlement offer on 19 April 2001 and reiterated the offer by letter dated 5 October 2001 in response to Plaintiff's 25 September 2001 settlement offer of $8,700.00. The trial court noted Defendant's offer of $6,720.00 expressly foreclosed any additional recovery for pre-judgment interest, costs, and fees. The trial court further found that Defendant's insurer withdrew the offer seven days before trial on 15 October 2001. Accordingly, the trial court fully considered the timing of Defendant's settlement offers.


V. Comparison of Settlement Offer with Jury Verdict


Finally, Defendant asserts the trial court failed to compare the settlement offers to the jury verdict as required by the sixth Washington factor. Because the trial court entered a finding reflecting the jury's verdict of $5,217.00 and also engaged in a full consideration of the parties' settlement offers, we reject this argument as well. See Davis, 147 N.C. App. at 108, 554 S.E.2d at 406 (" t is clear from the [trial] court's findings of fact that it considered the amount of the settlement offer as compared to the jury verdict since the court cited the settlement offer and jury verdict within the findings").


Conclusion


As illustrated above, the trial court's detailed findings demonstrate its review of the entire record in accordance with Washington. Defendant's contention that the trial court merely recited the Washington factors without applying them is therefore without merit.


Affirmed.


Judges TIMMONS-GOODSON and TYSON concur.


Report per Rule 30(e).






Page 1 2 3 

North Carolina Personal Injury Attorneys    Personal Injury Lawyers


  to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.

Personal Injury Lawyers Brain Injuries Spinal Cord Injuries
Quadriplegia and Paraplegia Back Injuries Ruptured & Herniated Disks
Bulging Disk Neck Injuries Dog Bites
Toxic Mold Product Liability Fire Accidents
Trucking Accidents Boating Accidents Car Accidents
Plane Crashes Medical Malpractice Motorcycle Accidents
Wrongful Death Personal Injury Lawsuits Testimonial
FDP  |   RSS Feeds  |  Articles  |  Jobs  |  Leads  |  Partner Websites
DUI Defense  |  SiteMap  | PI Blog  | Trading Partners | Attorney Registration  | PI Case Laws  | FAQ | Personal Injury Forum
 | Personal Injury Lawyers Directory  | Success Stories  | Press Releases
Copyright © 2005. “National Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (NAPIL)”. All rights reserved.
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE