chevron-down Created with Sketch Beta.

GPSolo eReport

GPSolo eReport May 2024

The Three Musketeers: Three Ways to Settle a Case Before Trial

Norina A Melita

Summary

  • New York’s Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) provides for three ways in which a defendant can try to settle before trial.
  • CPLR § 3219 involves a tender by the defendant in a contract cause of action, whereby the defendant deposits funds with the clerk of the county.
  • In CPLR § 3220, the defendant in a contract cause of action offers to liquidate damages conditionally.
  • In CPLR § 3221, the defendant in any action other than matrimonial may serve the plaintiff a written offer to allow judgment to be taken against him or her for a sum of money or property.
The Three Musketeers: Three Ways to Settle a Case Before Trial
Hans Neleman via Getty Images

Jump to:

New York’s Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) provides for three ways in which a defendant can try to settle before trial, which may have extreme benefits for the defendant, even if (or especially if) the offer is rejected. These three provisions are affectionately called “The Three Musketeers.” Although very similar, the three sections are nuanced.

Section 3219: Tender

CPLR § 3219 provides that, at any time no later than ten days before trial, a defendant in a contract cause of action may deposit with the clerk of the county an amount deemed by him or her to be sufficient to satisfy the claim and serve the plaintiff a written tender. If the tender is accepted by the plaintiff by withdrawing the sum posted with the clerk and filing satisfaction paperwork concluding the litigation, the clerk then enters a judgment dismissing the claim without costs. Acceptance must occur within ten days of the deposit with the clerk. If the tender is refused or not withdrawn from the clerk, the trial can be conducted in the normal course. If the verdict is for the plaintiff in excess of the tender, plaintiff can enter judgment in the amount of the verdict plus CPLR interest. If the verdict is less than the tender, the plaintiff loses CPLR interest from the date of the tender, and the right to recover statutory costs is forfeited. Additionally, the plaintiff is then responsible to pay the defendant’s costs of defending the action from the date of tender forward.

Section 3220: Offer to Liquidate Damages Conditionally

CPLR § 3220 provides that, at any time no later than ten days before trial, the defendant in a contract cause of action may serve upon the plaintiff an offer to allow judgment to be taken against him or her for a sum specified, with costs then accrued, if the defendant fails in his or her defense. If the plaintiff accepts the offer to liquidate damages conditionally, in writing, pursuant to this section, within ten days thereafter, and wins at trial, the plaintiff will be entitled only to the liquidated damages. If the offer is not accepted and the plaintiff’s verdict at trial is less favorable than the offer to liquidate, the plaintiff must pay the expenses incurred by the defendant in defending the action from the time of the offer.

Section 3221: Offer to Compromise

Finally, CPLR § 3221 provides that in any action other than matrimonial, at any time no later than ten days before trial, a defendant may serve the plaintiff a written offer to allow judgment to be taken against him or her for a sum of money or property, with costs then accrued. If the plaintiff accepts in writing within ten days thereafter, either party may enter judgment accordingly with the clerk. If the offer is not accepted and the plaintiff fails to obtain a more favorable judgment at trial, the plaintiff is prohibited from recovering costs from the time of the offer and instead shall pay the defendant’s costs from that time.

The Differences Between the Three Sections

The following table is a visual representation to assist in ascertaining the differences between these sections.

 

Tender (CPLR § 3219)

Offer to Liquidate Damages Conditionally (CPLR § 3220)

Offer to Compromise (CPLR § 3221)

Type of action used in

Based on a contract

Based on a contract

Any action except matrimonial

Time to be made

Anytime but no later than ten days before trial

Anytime but no later than ten days before trial

Anytime but no later than ten days before trial

Presentment

Payment of money to the clerk

Offer in writing

Offer in writing

Offer must include costs then accrued

No

Yes

Yes

Manner of acceptance

Withdrawal of the tender from the clerk within ten days of the deposit and satisfactory filing

Written notice by plaintiff within ten days from the service of the offer

Written notice by plaintiff within ten days from the service of the offer

Effect of acceptance

Judgment dismissing plaintiff’s claim without costs

Judgment in favor of plaintiff

Judgment in favor of plaintiff

Is jury informed?

No

No

No

Effect of “unacceptance”

Failure of plaintiff to recover more favorable judgment deprives plaintiff of interest and costs from the time of the offer, plus plaintiff must pay defendant’s costs for defending the action from the time of the offer through trial

Judgment in favor of plaintiff only if plaintiff prevails at trial. If plaintiff obtains a verdict smaller than the offer that was rejected, plaintiff must pay expenses incurred by defendant in trying the damages portion of the action from the time of the offer through trial

Judgment in favor of plaintiff only if plaintiff prevails at trial. If plaintiff obtains a verdict smaller than the offer that was rejected, plaintiff does not get costs from the time of the offer forward and must pay costs from the time of the offer

Computation of costs and expenses

Computation of statutory costs are calculated mechanistically under CPLR Article 82

Judge presiding over trial sets the amount of trial expenses that are awarded to defendant if plaintiff fails to win damages in excess of the offer*

Computation of statutory costs are calculated mechanistically under CPLR Article 82

*See Kirchoff-Consigli Constr. Mgmt. v. Dharmakaya, Inc., 186 A.D.3d 585 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020).

The Musketeers appear to be used sparingly, particularly in light of the Third Department’s decision in Card v. Budini, where the court held that the acceptance of an offer of settlement that resulted in judgment against the defendant on a property damage cause of action arising out of a motor vehicle accident precluded the defendant from denying liability under a personal injury cause of action arising out of the same accident. However, there may be some cases where the statutes can have value to a party, even on the part of a counterclaiming defendant. The diligent litigator will be served well to know the repercussions of accepting or rejecting these offers when presented. At the very minimum, these sections would force the pragmatic litigator to seriously assess the strengths of his or her case and the likelihood of success, which ultimately might result in settlement—after all, time not wasted is money well saved.

    Author