The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reminded defendants making Rule 68 offers to specific and clear because ambiguities will be resolved against them.
In Sanchez v. Prudential Pizza, Inc., 709 F. 3d 689 (7th Cir. 2013), defendant’s rule 68 offer of the $30,000.00 in exchange for “all plaintiff’s claims for relief” was accepted however the plaintiff then asked for costs and attorney fees as a prevailing party under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The district court held that the offer was unambiguous and therefore included the attorney fees. The Court of Appeals reviewed de novo the Court’s determination of the legal effect of the written Rule 68 offer and concluded that because the Rule 68 offer was silent as to costs and fees, that the costs and fees were not included. The Court held that the offering defendant bears the burden of any silence or ambiguity concerning attorney fees. The case was remanded for an appropriate award of attorney’s fees and other costs.