Obenchain v. Gross

• Decision Date: 08 July 1997
• Docket Number: No. 22668,22668
• Citation: 130 Idaho 448,942 P.2d 572
• Parties: Valerie OBENCHAIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Blaine Anthony GROSS, Defendant-Respondent. Boise, February 1997 Term
• Court: Idaho Supreme Court

Page 572

942 P.2d 572

130 Idaho 448

Valerie OBENCHAIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Blaine Anthony GROSS, Defendant-Respondent.

No. 22668.

Supreme Court of Idaho,

Boise, February 1997 Term.

July 8, 1997.

Steveley Law Offices, Boise, for appellant.

Quane, Smith, Howard & Hull, Boise, for respondent.

McDEVITT, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order of the trial court in which the appellant was ordered to pay sanctions in the form of expenses incurred by the respondent in obtaining its order to compel discovery.

I. FACTS AND PRIOR PROCEEDINGS

This is an action for personal injury brought by appellant (Obenchain) in the course of which certain requests for admissions and discovery requests under I.R.C.P. 37 were made by the respondent (Gross). Based on the conduct of Obenchain, Gross filed Motions to Compel, and Motion for Sanctions pursuant to I.R.C.P. 11 and 37.

On May 22, 1995, pursuant to I.R.C.P. 68, Gross filed with the court and served upon Obenchain an Offer of Judgment; on May 24, 1995, Gross filed a Motion to Compel Discovery and a Motion for Sanctions pursuant thereto; on June 7, 1995, the trial court heard argument on Gross's Motion to Compel and Motion for Sanctions, the trial court then indicated that it would be issuing a written order regarding Gross's motions, but "hinted" that it was likely to grant them.

On June 8, 1995, Obenchain accepted, in writing, Gross's Offer of Judgment. Judgment was entered by the trial court on that date. On June 18, 1995, the trial court issued a formal written decision on Gross's Motion to Compel and Motion for Sanctions pursuant to I.R.C.P. 11 and 37, although final Judgment had been entered based upon the acceptance of the Offer of Judgment on June 8th. Obenchain filed a Motion to Disallow Fees and Costs, as ordered by the trial court. The trial court heard argument on this Motion and issued a written opinion confirming its earlier decision denying Obenchain's Motion to Disallow Fees and Costs and entered Judgment against Obenchain in the amount of $750.00, pursuant to I.R.C.P. 11. From this Judgment, Obenchain appeals.

II. ISSUE ON APPEAL

The issue framed by Obenchain is whether the trial court can alter, amend or modify an accepted Offer of Judgment under Rule 68 of the I.R.C.P.

Gross's Offer of Judgment, pursuant to I.R.C.P. 68 provided in pertinent part:

[h]ereby offers to allow judgment to be taken against him in an amount totaling Twenty-Four Thousand and No/100th ($24,000.00) Dollars, subject to and pursuant to the terms as set forth herein, which shall be incorporated into the Judgment submitted to the Court, such Judgment shall include (1) any attorney fees allowable and litigation costs incurred to date; (2) said Judgment shall be inclusive of, and directly set forth, the following claims or liens pending against this Defendant: ....

Obenchain argues that the language contained in the Offer of Judgment, which was accepted by her, providing that it shall include "any attorney fees allowable and litigation costs incurred to date" precludes the entry by trial court of the Judgment post-issuance of the Judgment pursuant to her accepting the Offer of Judgment.

At the time of the argument of Obenchain's Motion to Disallow Fees and Costs, after hearing extensive argument, the trial court, in open court, made the following statement:

I find that the claim for...