Following settlement negotiations in a personal injury action arising from a motor vehicle accident, the parties sought a judicial determination of whether an earlier Rule 49 offer to settle remained open for acceptance after the defendants delivered a subsequent “revised” offer.
The plaintiffs purported to accept the original offer after the revised offer clarified the allocation of damages and limited prejudgment interest to certain heads of damages.
The court held that the revised offer constituted a new offer that implicitly withdrew the earlier offer.
Even if the original offer had remained open, the plaintiffs could not reasonably rely on its literal wording because they knew the revised terms limited the interest calculation.
The court concluded that the original offer was not open for acceptance when the plaintiffs attempted to accept it.
