In action alleging that defendant-debt collector violated Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) by suing plaintiff in wrong forum, Dist. Ct. erred in denying defendant’s motion to dismiss instant action based on plaintiff’s $5,000 settlement of its similar action against plaintiff’s creditor, even though plaintiff had settled all claims except for claim against defendant for statutory damages under FDCPA, and where jury subsequently awarded plaintiff $200 in statutory damages as well as $69,393.75 in attorney fees and $772.95 in costs. Record showed that plaintiff sued defendant and creditor under FDCPA, as well state statutory claim, and instant release did not apportion any of $5,000 settlement to any particular claim. Moreover, plaintiff is generally entitled to only single recovery for single injury regardless of how many defendants could be liable for said injury or how many different recoveries could apply to single injury. As such, Dist. Ct. should have granted defendant’s motion to dismiss on mootness grounds instant FDCPA action, where: (1) plaintiff agreed to dismiss all of her claims against creditor for $5,000 without allocating any recovery to any particular claim; (2) instant claim for FDCPA statutory damages was capped at $1,000; (3) Dist. Ct. erred by attributing settlement funds to other claims to exclusion of FDCPA damages; and (4) plaintiff had only single claim for $1,000, regardless of number of defendants plaintiff sued under FDCPA. Also, instant settlement precluded plaintiff from obtaining any attorney fees, costs or statutory damages.