In 2016, the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, resolving a circuit split on whether an unaccepted offer of judgment pursuant to Rule 68 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure could moot a named plaintiff's individual claim, thus dooming the class claims. The decision – which held that an unaccepted Rule 68 offer cannot moot such claims – left class defendants a glimmer of hope by suggesting the result "might be different" if a defendant pairs his or her offer with an actual tender of payment, such as a certified check or a deposit to the court registry. Since then, class defendants have sought to invoke the "Campbell hypothetical" with increasing frequency, lodging evermore creative arguments in favor of mootness. Lower courts, however, have met these tactics with skepticism and have reached divergent – and sometimes directly contradictory – results.
On May 17, BakerHostetler attorney David McMillan will present a webinar, "The 2018 Class Action Landscape: Minimizing Litigation Risks and Challenges," sponsored by The Knowledge Group. David will discuss the evolving state of play surrounding the use of Rule 68 offers of judgment to stop a class action in its tracks by mooting a named plaintiff's individual claim. The presentation will canvas this post-Campbell landscape. Seeking to educate companies and counsel about the risks and potential rewards of deploying Rule 68, David will analyze the impact of Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez and recent lower-court decisions and offer some practical insights on how to maximize chances of success. To learn more, click here.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
