Zamora v. Clayborn Contracting Group, Inc

In Zamora v. Clayborn Contracting Group, Inc. (2002) 28 Cal.4th 249, the moving party's attorney made a typographical error in a settlement offer under section 998, offering to settle the matter for a judgment against, rather than in favor of, the attorney's client. The opposing party, not surprisingly, accepted the offer and judgment was entered against the attorney's client. The client moved under the discretionary provision of section 473 to vacate the judgment on the ground of excusable mistake, and the trial court granted the motion. (Zamora, supra, 28 Cal.4th at pp. 252-253.) The Supreme Court held that "the trial court reasonably concluded that the mistake made by Zamora's counsel was excusable" because it was a "mistake that could have been made by anybody." (Id. at p. 259.) The Supreme Court recently examined the "excusable mistake" requirement of the discretionary provision of section 473. The Court explained that, "in determining whether the attorney's mistake or inadvertence was excusable, 'the court inquires whether "a reasonably prudent person under the same or similar circumstances" might have made the same error.' In other words, the discretionary relief provision of section 473 only permits relief from attorney error 'fairly imputable to the client, i.e., mistakes anyone could have made.' 'Conduct falling below the professional standard of care, such as failure to timely object or to properly advance an argument, is not therefore excusable. To hold otherwise would be to eliminate the express statutory requirement of excusability and effectively eviscerate the concept of attorney malpractice.' " (Zamora, supra, 28 Cal.4th at p. 258.)