Hillenbrand v. Meyer Medical Group, SC

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining the procedures for a trial court to follow when ruling on a pending motion for class certification
• finding that a tender made in the form of letter offering to resolve the case by giving the plaintiff “the relief sought,” namely, one third of the amount sought plus reasonable interest was sufficient to moot the plaintiff’s class action
• explaining the procedures for a trial court to follow when ruling on a pending motion for class certification
• refusing to “allow a party to avoid ever defending a class action suit by simply tendering payment to the named plaintiffs, in each class action filed against it, prior to the trial court’s ruling on their motion for class certification”
• refusing to “allow a party to avoid ever defending a class action suit by simply tendering payment to the named plaintiffs, in each class action filed against it, prior to the trial court’s ruling on their motion for class certification”
• in rejecting the plaintiffs’ argument that a tender did not moot their claim, because they did not accept it, the court noted that the defendant’s “offer has never been withdrawn”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).