Since the enactment of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), the FCC has long held that persons who knowingly and voluntarily release their telephone numbers have provided prior express consent to be called. But...more
As the walls start to close in for the plaintiffs’ bar on the definition of an “automatic telephone dialing system” (“ATDS”) under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), plaintiffs’ attorneys continue to rely on...more
The dust was finally settling. District and Circuit courts around the country were rejecting the Ninth Circuit’s overly broad interpretation of the definition of an automatic telephone dialing system (“ATDS”) under the...more
Following the Eleventh Circuit’s opinion a few weeks ago, the Seventh Circuit just held that dialing equipment must be capable of storing or producing telephone numbers using a random or sequential number generator in order...more
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act case law interpreting the definition of an “automatic telephone dialing system” (“ATDS”) is changing under plaintiffs’ feet and coalescing against the definition set forth in Marks v....more
On January 28, 2020, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals dealt a body-blow to serial TCPA scammers and everyone else who has disingenuously argued over the past decade that any type of “automated” dialing equipment is...more
In doing so, the First Circuit both expanded the scope of TCPA liability while simultaneously making compliance virtually impossible for callers.
Cellular services and VOIP -
The ATDS prohibition of the TCPA regulates...more
The potential payday of a TCPA class action is huge. Sometimes, it makes otherwise good attorneys convince themselves of really bad ideas when chasing those dollar signs. Derrick v. Kroger Co., No. 3:19-cv-00106, 2019 U.S....more
Ringless Voicemail (“RVM”), also known as direct-to-voicemail, is a growing telecommunications technology that allows telemarketers and businesses to “drop” voicemails directly into a consumer’s telephone voicemail. To do so,...more
Yesterday morning, the Supreme Court issued its decision in PDR Network, LLC, et al. v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, Inc. At issue was whether a TCPA-defendant in a civil case may contest the Federal Communications...more
In Snow v. GE, No. 5:18-CV-511-FL, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99760 (E.D.N.C. June 14, 2019), a North Carolina federal court dismissed a TCPA claim on the grounds that dialing equipment must possess a random or sequential number...more
In Simmons v. Charter Communs., Inc., No. 15-cv-317, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42091 (D. Conn. March 30, 2016), the District of Connecticut granted summary judgment in favor of Charter Communications in a putative class action...more
In Friedman v. Nat’l Programming Servs., LLC, No. CV 15-4866, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40575 (C.D. Cal. March 25, 2016), the Central District of California granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant, National Programming...more
In Bridgeview Health Care Center, Ltd. v. Jerry Clark d/b/a Affordable Digital Housing, No. 14-3728 (7th Cir. March 21, 2016), the Seventh Circuit issued a multilayered decision regarding the use of subclasses under Fed. R....more
In Baisden v. Credit Adjustments, Inc., No. 15-3411 (6th Cir. Feb. 12, 2016), the Sixth Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of Credit Adjustments, Inc. in a putative class action alleging violations of the Telephone...more
In Stevens-Bratton v. TruGreen, Inc., No. 15-cv-2472, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3365 (W.D. Tenn. Jan. 12, 2016), the District Court for the Western District of Tennessee denied class certification of a putative class action...more
In Ewing Indus. Corp. v. Bob Wines Nursery, No. 14-13842, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 13484 (11th Cir. Aug. 3, 2015), the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the pendency of a prior purported class action does not toll the...more
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 (“TCPA”), prohibits initiating a telephone call using a prerecorded voice to wireless or residential telephone numbers unless the called party consents to receiving the...more
Ronald and Anna Andermann filed suit against Sprint Spectrum L.P., alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 (“TCPA”), arising out of several service phone calls they received from Sprint...more
Kenneth Boyer filed a putative class action against Diversified Consultants, Inc. (“DCI”) and LiveVox, Inc., in the United States District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, alleging that DCI, through LiveVox, initiated...more
Lori Shamblin filed a putative class action against Obama For America, alleging that she had received two unsolicited telephone calls to her cellular phone that were made with an auto-dialer and used pre-recorded messages, in...more
On March 25, 2014, Brian Jackson received a text message on his cellular phone, allegedly making an offer for cruise ticks on behalf of Caribbean Cruise Line (“CCL”). Jackson filed suit against AdSource Marketing Ltd....more
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 (“TCPA”), prohibits the transmission of “an unsolicited fax advertisement.” Rosen Family Chiropractic (“Rosen”) filed suit against Chi-Town Pizza on Div. St. (“Chi-Town...more
In Glauser v. GroupMe, Inc., the Northern District California granted summary judgment in favor of GroupMe, Inc. (“GroupMe”) in a putative class action alleging that GroupMe sent text messages via an automatic telephone...more
Amanda Balschmiter’s boyfriend, Victor Loshek, purchased a car with a loan that was serviced by TD Auto Finance LLC (“TDAF”), and subsequently defaulted on the loan. Balschmiter, on Loshek’s behalf, began making calls on her...more