Another federal judge in the Eastern District of Michigan dismissed a putative class action against a vehicle manufacturer on prudential mootness grounds, holding that the manufacturer’s voluntary recall program mooted the plaintiffs’ claims. See Letson v. Ford Motor Co., 2024 WL 845844 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 28, 2024).Continue Reading Another Federal Court Holds that Recall Moots Class-Action Claims
prudential mootness
Michigan Federal Court Holds That Manufacturer’s Voluntary Recall Renders Plaintiffs’ Claims Prudentially Moot
Another court in the Eastern District of Michigan recently dismissed a putative class action on prudential mootness grounds, holding that the manufacturer’s voluntary recall program—which was supervised by a federal administrative agency—mooted the plaintiffs’ consumer fraud and warranty claims. See Pacheco v. Ford Motor Co., 2023 WL 2603937 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 22, 2023).Continue Reading Michigan Federal Court Holds That Manufacturer’s Voluntary Recall Renders Plaintiffs’ Claims Prudentially Moot
Even After Campbell-Ewald, a Refund Offer Can Still Sometimes Moot a Case
In Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, 577 U.S. 153, 163 (2016), as revised (Feb. 9, 2016), the Supreme Court held that an unaccepted offer of judgment cannot moot a plaintiff’s claims. While that decision left some questions unanswered, recent Court of Appeals decisions have applied its reasoning to broader situations, such as holding that an unaccepted refund offer made prior to litigation does not deprive a plaintiff of standing to sue. Adam v. Barone, 41 F.4th 230, 234 (3d Cir. 2022).
Another court recently added a twist to the analysis, holding that offering a full refund may make dismissal appropriate under the prudential mootness doctrine. See Sharp v. FCA US LLC, 2022 WL 14721245 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 25, 2022).Continue Reading Even After Campbell-Ewald, a Refund Offer Can Still Sometimes Moot a Case