Skye v. Matthews, supra, stands for the proposition that offers to settle are result, not issue, oriented. Thus, when a non-severable offer to one party specifies different amounts for the various issues at stake in the proceeding, the offer is not to be compared to the judgment on an issue-by-issue basis. If the total amount offered to the plaintiff exceeds the total amount obtained at trial, the offer should be considered under Rule 49.10. From the point of view of the objectives of offers to settle, this reasoning makes sense. The plaintiff can accept the offer and receive the amount specified. Which issue the amount is allocated towards makes no difference to the result that a plaintiff achieves by accepting the offer.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.