Broughton et al v. HPA Subway, Inc.
Order striking the 17 Offer of Judgment filed by HPA Subway, Inc.. Signed by Chief Judge William H. Steele on 7/25/2011. (tgw)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
KRISTIN BROUGHTON, et al.,
HPA SUBWAY, INC.,
) CIVIL ACTION 11-0036-WS-N
The defendant has filed an unaccepted offer of judgment. (Doc. 17). This is
improper. Fed. R. Civ. 68(a) (offer is to be served, not filed; once the offer is accepted,
“either party may then file the offer and notice of acceptance”). “Rule 68 exhibits a
strong federal policy against filing such offers with the court and a party may incur a
significant sanction for filing an unaccepted offer of judgment.” Scottsdale Insurance
Co. v. Tolliver, 2009 WL 3233802 at *4 (N.D. Okla. 2009). The routine remedy is to
strike the improperly filed offer. E.g., Berberena-Garcia v. Aviles, 258 F.R.D. 39, 40
(D.P.R. 2009); Estate of Enoch v. Tienor, 2008 WL 3244230 at *1 (E.D. Wis. 2008);
Bechtol v. Marsh & McLennan Cos., 2008 WL 2074046 at *2 (W.D. Wash. 2008);
Dieujuste v. R.J. Electric, Inc., 2007 WL 2409831 at *1 (S.D. Fla. 2007); St. Paul Fire &
Marine Insurance Co. v. City of Detroit, 2007 WL 4126542 at *2 (E.D. Mich. 2007).
For the reasons set forth above, the offer of judgment is stricken.
DONE and ORDERED this 25th day of July, 2011.
s/ WILLIAM H. STEELE
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?