Florida lawyers find themselves facing yet another appellate decision invalidating a Proposal for Settlement. Yes, it's been about a month since a Proposal was shot down like this case. Or this one.

In our instant case, which admittedly is a new twist on a tired issue, the Fourth District held that Proposals for Settlement cannot be used to resolve cases involving both claims for damages and injunctive relief.

In Palm Beach Polo Holdings, Inc. v. Equestrian Club Estates Owners Association (Kaplan, Polen and Ciklin), a land dispute resulted in a complaint seeking two counts of declaratory / injunctive relief and one count for damages. Multiple Proposals for Settlement were served and each sought to resolve the entire case.

The appellate court noted that, "the offer of judgment statute applies only to civil actions for damages" according to Florida Statute 768.79. Here, there was clearly a mix of counts for damages and injunctive relief. At best, the Proposal was ambiguous as to whether it meant both. Since Proposals are interpreted strictly, with "ambiguity" being the death knell, the Fourth DCA held the Proposal invalid. If the Proposal had been fashioned to resolve only the damages claim, it apparently would have otherwise been deemed valid.

Help still exists: check out the article, "Building a Better Proposal for Settlement," which, despite tough appellate rulings since its publication in 2008, appears to still offer solid guidance. Go to Florida Law Commentary and click the "2008 Proposal for Settlement" link under "Articles." Note: if you've used a Proposal which follows the format discussed in that article, email us the hearing transcript and order.