Campbell-Ewald’s argument is that it offered Gomez “complete relief” in the form of $1,503 plus court costs to settle his individual claim. According to Campbell-Ewald, this is the maximum amount of relief that Gomez could obtain under the TCPA if the company was found liable in court. Thus, Campbell-Ewald argues, its complete offer leaves nothing for a judge or jury to decide. Everyone’s on the same page: Gomez has asked for relief and Campbell-Ewald wants to give him that relief. No controversy. No case. Everyone goes home happy.
Except that Campbell-Ewald’s offer of “complete relief” might not actually be complete. In this exchange, at the opening of Garre’s argument, you’ll hear Justice Scalia ask whether there’s any dispute that the company’s offer is actually “complete relief.” Listen as Justices Kagan and Sotomayor chime in to point out how incomplete Campbell-Ewald’s offer really is.