Pitney v. California

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a rejected settlement offer under rule 68, by itself, cannot moot a case
• explaining that if the parties do not “agree that a judgment should be entered against the defendant, ... the district court should not enter judgment against the defendant if it does not provide complete relief’
• discussing this issue and holding that unaccepted Rule 68 offer does not render claims moot
• “Absent such agreement [between the parties], however, the district court should not enter judgment against the defendant if it does not provide complete relief.”
• “Absent . . . agreement . . . , the district court should not enter judgment against the defendant if it does not provide complete relief.”
• “A case becomes moot pursuant to Article II’s Case or Controversy Clause when it is impossible for a court to grant any effectual relief whatever to the prevailing party.” (cleaned up) (citing Knox v. Serv. Emps. Int’l Union, Local 1000, 567 U.S. 298, 307 (2012))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).