Sebestyen v. Leikin, Ingber & Winters, P.C.

646 F. App'x 444
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedApril 27, 2016
DocketNo. 15-1517
StatusPublished

This text of 646 F. App'x 444 (Sebestyen v. Leikin, Ingber & Winters, P.C.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Sebestyen v. Leikin, Ingber & Winters, P.C., 646 F. App'x 444 (6th Cir. 2016).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The district court, bound by then-governing Sixth Circuit precedent, held that the defendants’ unaccepted offer of judgment “rendered this case moot.” Sebestyen v. Leikin, Ingber & Winters, P.C., No. 13-CV-15182, 2015 WL 1439881, at *6-7 (E.D.Mich. Mar. 27, 2015). After the [445]*445plaintiff appealed, the Supreme Court came out the other way, holding that “an unaccepted settlement offer or offer of judgment does not moot a plaintiffs case.” Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, — U.S. -, 136 S.Ct. 663, 672, 193 L.Ed.2d 671 (2016). In light of Campbell-Ewald, we vacate the district court’s order and remand for further proceedings.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez
577 U.S. 153 (Supreme Court, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
646 F. App'x 444, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sebestyen-v-leikin-ingber-winters-pc-ca6-2016.