News & Analysis as of

Subject Matter Jurisdiction Telephone Consumer Protection Act

Klein Moynihan Turco LLP

TCPA Vicarious Liability

An Illinois federal district court judge recently held that State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“State Farm”) may be vicariously liable for alleged Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) violations. In Nater...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

ATDS Sufficiently Alleged, Illinois Court Says

The use of a “STOP” notification in a text message—as well as a dedicated 1-833 toll-free number and the generic nature of the message—may indicate the use of an automatic telephone dialing system (ATDS), an Illinois federal...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

NC Federal Court Permits Suit Based on FCC Internal DNC Registry Violation

Widening a split among courts that have considered the issue, a North Carolina district court held that a violation of the Do Not Call (DNC) regulations of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) triggered liability under...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Lacking Injury, Florida Federal Court Remands TCPA Case to State

Finding that a defendant failed to carry the burden to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction as the removing party, a U.S. district court in Florida granted a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) plaintiff’s...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Another Fifth Circuit Court to Follow in Creasy’s Footsteps

The Eastern District of Texas recently dismissed a plaintiff’s TCPA claim in Cunningham v. Matrix Financial Services, LLC,  No. 4:29-cv-896 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 31, 2021) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. This decision...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

S.D. Fla. Court Remands Case to State Court, Finding No Article III Injury

The Southern District of Florida recently remanded a case back to state court because the defendant that removed the case failed to establish that plaintiff suffered an Article III injury. Harris v. Travel Resorts of America,...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Artful Pleading Won’t Circumvent Sovereign Immunity, Fourth Circuit Says

In Cunningham v. Lester, —F.3d—, 2021 WL 821467 (4th Cir. Mar. 4, 2021), the Fourth Circuit reiterated that the doctrine of sovereign immunity is alive and well and very much applicable to putative TCPA claims, and that...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Another District Court Joins Creasy Split

Recently, the Eastern District of Missouri added to the split among courts deciding whether they can hear TCPA claims alleging robocall violations that occurred when the now-invalidated government debt exception was part of...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Two More District Courts Disagree with Creasy

Confusion continues amongst federal district courts in the wake of Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants, Inc. (“AAPC”), 140 S. Ct. 2335 (2020), the Supreme Court decision that held the TCPA’s government-debt...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Northern District of Florida Picks Side in Creasy Split

In the aftermath of Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants, Inc.—the Supreme Court decision from July that held the TCPA’s government-debt exception to be an unconstitutional content-based restriction on...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Eastern District of California Adds to Creasy Split

As we have reported... a growing number of district courts are issuing opinions addressing whether they have subject matter jurisdiction over TCPA claims alleging robocall violations that occurred when the government debt...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

District Court (Again) Holds Text Messages Insufficient to Confer Article III Standing

The Southern District of Florida recently dismissed a TCPA claim sua sponte for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, finding that the plaintiff had not alleged a concrete injury-in-fact.  See Perez v. Golden Trust Insurance,...more

Burr & Forman

Ohio District Court Holds TCPA Unenforceable From 2015 Through 2020

Burr & Forman on

Lidenbaum v. Realgy, LLC, 2020 WL 6361915 (N.D. Ohio Oct. 29, 2020) - Pending before the Court was a class action lawsuit, contending Defendants violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 § U.S.C. 227 (“TCPA”)....more

Goodwin

Louisiana District Court Finds TCPA Robocall Prohibition Unconstitutional Prior to July 2020

Goodwin on

On September 28, 2020, Judge Martin C. Feldman of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana issued an important decision that could impact Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) litigation...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

District Court Holds that Under Barr v. AAPC it Lacked Subject Matter Jurisdiction Over All TCPA Claims for Calls Made Prior to...

Womble Bond Dickinson on

In Stacy Creasy, et al. v. Charter Communications, Inc., No. CV 20-1199, 2020 WL 5761117 (E.D. La. Sept. 28, 2020) (Creasy), a putative class action, the plaintiffs accused defendant Charter Communications, Inc. of repeatedly...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Seventh Circuit Disagrees with Ninth Circuit and Joins the Third and Eleventh Circuit in Adopting a Narrow Interpretation of ATDS

In a decision released on February 19 that relied principally on rules of grammar, the Seventh Circuit held that to be an ATDS under the TCPA, a device must be capable of storing or producing telephone numbers using a random...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

American Pipe? No Cigar: Third Circuit Rejects Tolling for Claims of Named Plaintiffs

Earlier this year, the Supreme Court in China Agritech Inc. v. Resh conclusively established that equitable tolling of the statute of limitations for putative class members – known as American Pipe tolling – applies only to...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

A Sign of Things to Come in TCPA Lawsuits?: Plaintiffs Use Lack of Article III Standing as a Sword to Avoid Federal Jurisdiction

Womble Bond Dickinson on

We reported last month on a case where a defendant had moved to dismiss a plaintiff’s TCPA claim based on lack of Article III standing, only to end up back in the state court from which the case was removed. And just as Jay...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

5 TCPA Class Action Trends to Watch in 2018 – Legislation, Administrative Law & Litigation

Have the GOP’s Hopes for Enacting the Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act Been Dashed? – Passed in March 2017 by the U.S. House of Representatives, the Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act of 2017, H.R. 985, has...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

A Look Back at Significant Developments in Class Action Law in 2017

From the standpoint of class action practice, 2017 was as important for what did not happen as for what did. Here are some of the highlights and lowlights of the 2017 class action scorecard, with a look forward to how the...more

Burr & Forman

Illinois District Court Dismisses TCPA Claim Because Calls Were Not Unwanted or Unwelcome

Burr & Forman on

Telephone Science Corp. v. Asset Recovery Solutions, LLC, No. 15-cv-5182, 2016 WL 4179150 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 8, 2016) Plaintiff operates a service called “Nomorobo” designed to help consumers avoid incoming robocalls by...more

Burr & Forman

Dismissal of TCPA Claims for Lack of Standing Does Not Mandate Remand to the State Court

Burr & Forman on

After granting summary judgment for lack of standing against a plaintiff who bought multiple cell phones and numbers for purposes of filing TCPA lawsuits, the Court was faced with a Motion to Amend Judgment wherein Plaintiff...more

BakerHostetler

Ninth Circuit First to Take Up Offers of Judgment After Campbell-Ewald

BakerHostetler on

As we reported earlier this year in Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, 136 S. Ct. 663, 672 (2016), the Supreme Court held that a putative class action does not become moot when a defendant merely offers a named plaintiff full...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Class Dismissed

No Method to the Mootness: Ninth Circuit Rejects Allstate’s Effort to Moot Class Action Claims

On April 12, 2016, in Chen, et al. v. Allstate Insurance Co., No. 13-16816, the Ninth Circuit considered whether an unaccepted offer of judgment and tender of payment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 to fully...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Class Dismissed

Keeping it in Court: Unaccepted Offer of Judgment Doesn’t Moot Class Claims

On April 6, 2016, the Third Circuit, in Weitzner v. Sanofi Pasteur, Inc., considered whether an offer of judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 moots a plaintiff’s entire action, including class claims, thereby...more

37 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide