## Facts

- Jane Jaffrey sued Baggy Bunny, Inc. for premises liability after she slipped and fell on its property in November 1994.
- Baggy Bunny served two settlement proposals under Florida’s offer-of-judgment framework: $501 and later $7,501; Jaffrey rejected both.
- The case proceeded to a jury trial, resulting in a defense verdict for Baggy Bunny.
- After the verdict, Baggy Bunny served a motion to tax attorney’s fees and costs under section 768.79 based only on the $501 proposal.
- The trial court found the $501 proposal was made in bad faith, but still awarded fees and costs by relying on the $7,501 proposal, even though no timely motion had been served based on that offer.
- Jaffrey appealed the fee-and-cost award.

## Issues

1. Whether a defendant may recover attorney’s fees and costs based on a $7,501 proposal for settlement when it failed to serve an appropriate, offer-specific motion within 30 days after the jury’s verdict as required by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442(g).
2. Whether a trial court may award fees and costs based on a proposal not identified in the movant’s timely motion, where the only proposal referenced in the motion was found to have been made in bad faith.

## Decision

- The appellate court reversed the order awarding attorney’s fees and costs to Baggy Bunny.
- Rule 1.442(g) required service of an appropriate motion within 30 days after the jury’s verdict.
- Baggy Bunny’s timely motion referenced only the $501 proposal; it did not timely seek fees based on the $7,501 proposal.
- Because the $501 proposal was found to have been made in bad faith, it could not support an award, and the trial court could not switch the basis of the award to the $7,501 proposal absent a timely, particularized motion.

## Legal Principles

- A party seeking sanctions under Florida’s offer-of-judgment statute must comply with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442(g) by serving an appropriate motion within 30 days after the jury’s verdict (in a jury action).
- A motion seeking fees and costs under the offer-of-judgment framework must state with particularity the grounds and the relief sought, including identifying the specific proposal on which the request is based.
- A proposal for settlement found to be made in bad faith cannot serve as the predicate for fees and costs under section 768.79.
- Courts apply strict compliance to the procedural requirements governing proposals for settlement and fee motions; failure to meet required elements or timing precludes an award.

## Conclusion

The appellate court held that fees and costs could not be awarded based on an unmentioned settlement proposal when the movant failed to timely serve an offer-specific motion under Rule 1.442(g), and the only proposal referenced in the timely motion was found to have been made in bad faith.


Jaffrey v. Baggy Bunny, Inc., 733 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)