Anthony M. Frazier v. Castle Ford, Ltd., f/k/a ... - Maryland Courts

The Seventh Circuit agreed. In so holding, the Court stated, “Grove may not spurn
this offer of all the damages he is owed and proceed to trial. See Alliance to End Repression
v. City of Chicago, 820 F.2d 873, 878 (7th Cir. 1978). ‘Once the defendant offers to satisfy
the plaintiff’s entire demand, there is no dispute over which to litigate, and a plaintiff who
refuses to acknowledge this loses outright, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1), because he has no
remaining stake.’” Id. at 1147, quoting Rand v. Monsanto Co., 926 F.2d 596, 598 (7th Cir.
1991).
In A. A. Allen Revivals v. Campbell, A. A. Allen Revivals filed a complaint against
the United States to recover taxes erroneously collected, seeking a refund of the taxes paid
with interest. 353 F.2d 89, 90 (5th Cir. 1965) (per curiam). After the complaint had been
filed, the Government tendered to A. A. Allen Revivals the full amount of the taxes collected
with interest, which A. A. Allen Revivals did not accept. Id. The trial judge then dismissed
the complaint as moot because A. A. Allen had received the relief it sought in its complaint.
Id. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed, holding that the tender of the full
amount sought in the complaint was sufficient to justify dismissal of the action. Id.
In Yu v. International Business Machines Corp., 732 N.E. 2d 1173 (Ill. App. 2000),
the Illinois intermediate appellate court considered the dismissal of a complaint of a health
care practitioner who had purchased a medical device in 1996 believing that it was “year
2000 (Y2K) compliant,” when, in fact, it was not. Id. at 1175. After being notified that the
upgrade to make the device “year 2000 (Y2K) compliant” would cost him more than $2,000,
Dr. Yu filed a class action suit against the manufacturer for compensatory damages for
3