Readers of our blog may recall a recent piece in which we discussed a Florida Telephone Solicitation Act (“FTSA”) lawsuit pending in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. In Morris v. Lincare,...more
Although the Illinois Genetic Information Privacy Act (GIPA), 410 ILCS 513/1, et seq. was largely ignored by plaintiffs’ attorneys until this year, its substantial statutory penalties and recent case law make it an enticing...more
Among other things, the federal TCPA imposes liability for calling/texting cell phone numbers using an Automatic Telephone Dialing System (“ATDS”) without sufficient prior express consent. As defined by the TCPA, ATDS is...more
The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (“COBRA”) became law on April 7, 1986. For most of its nearly 35-year history, litigation involving COBRA has been relatively quiet. Most COBRA claims are tag-alongs, added...more
Last week the Eleventh Circuit revealed that it would schedule an en banc rehearing of its prior approval of a $6.3M class action settlement in Price v. Godiva Chocolatier Inc., et al., case number 16-16486....more
The West Virginia Legislature is in session and again is considering a bill to reduce penalties available under the West Virginia Consumer Credit and Protection Act ("WVCCPA" or "Act"). The Act is the primary statute under...more
Class action plaintiffs’ attorneys may argue that a recent ruling by the Ninth Circuit expands the scope of liability under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) to include calls or text messages sent on all modern...more
Despite the significant passage of time since the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates v. Allstate Insurance, courts continue to wrestle with whether state statutory class action bars are...more
Augustus v. ABM Security Services, Inc. On December 22, 2016, the California Supreme Court in Augustus v. ABM Security Services, Inc., ruled that California law prohibits on-duty and on-call rest periods. You may...more
As we have noted in prior posts, many states require courts to bifurcate punitive damages trials upon the defendant’s request. The question therefore arises whether a federal court sitting in diversity must or, at least...more
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227, et seq. (“TCPA”), prohibits “robo-calls” to cell phones, text messages and “junk” faxes without prior consent. It imposes statutory penalties from $500 to $1,500 per...more
Class actions under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), 47 U.S.C. § 227, continue to be an active trend in consumer and privacy class action litigation. The TCPA, which was historically called the "fax blast"...more