Carolyn Sebestyen v. Leikin, Ingber & Winters, P.c.; Paul M. Ingber

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION
File Name: 16a0225n.06
Case No. 15-1517
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
CAROLYN SEBESTYEN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
LEIKIN, INGBER & WINTERS, P.C.; PAUL
M. INGBER,
Defendants-Appellees.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED
STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF
MICHIGAN
BEFORE: SUTTON and KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judges; BECKWITH, District Judge.*
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 plaintiff appealed, the Supreme Court came out the other way, holding that
“an unaccepted settlement offer or offer of judgment does not moot a plaintiff’s case.”
Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, 136 S. Ct. 663, 672 (2016). In light of Campbell-Ewald, we
vacate the district court’s order and remand for further proceedings.
* The Honorable Sandra S. Beckwith, Senior United States District Judge for the Southern District of Ohio,
sitting by designation.

-- 1 of 1 --