Valerie Audiffred, Petitioner v. Thomas B. Arnold, Respondent

Summary

The Court approved the decision reversing an award of attorney fees and costs because the settlement proposal, although naming only Audiffred as the offeror, would have resolved both Audiffred's and Kimmons's claims without allocating the settlement amount between them. The Court held that the proposal was therefore a joint proposal subject to the apportionment requirement and was fatally ambiguous under the offer-of-judgment statute and rule. Justice Canady, dissenting and joined by Justice Polston, would have dismissed the case for lack of conflict jurisdiction.