As discussed here, on February 15, 2024, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) approved amendments to the rules and regulations implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). These amendments were...more
On September 25, 2024, 1-800-LAW-FIRM, PLLC (“Defendant”) was sued in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan for allegedly violating the automatic telephone dialing system (“ATDS”) and National...more
On September 19, 2024, Judge Lorna G. Schofield, District Judge for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, issued an informative TCPA consent-related decision in Watson v. Manhattan Luxury...more
In a recent ruling, a U.S. District Court for the Central District of California granted a defendant’s motion to dismiss a complaint brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). The complaint alleged that the...more
On May 10, 2024, the Second Circuit held in Soliman v. Subway Franchisee Advertising Fund Trust Ltd., No. 22-1726 (2d Cir. May 10, 2024), that a device that selects and dials numbers from a stored list does not constitute an...more
The U.S. Supreme Court's 2021 decision in Facebook Inc. v. Duguid resolved a long-standing circuit split over the definition of an automatic telephone dialing system, or ATDS, under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. ...more
On November 22, 2023, the FCC released a Second Report and Order, Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, and Waiver Order (Report and Order) outlining new, proposed rules implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47...more
In Perrong v. Bradford et al, the plaintiff alleged that the defendant, an elected official, violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) by calling his residential phone using a prerecorded message and an automatic...more
Ever since the Supreme Court confirmed that the TCPA’s autodialer restrictions apply only to devices that generate numbers randomly or sequentially, the plaintiffs’ bar has been digging deep for new theories of liability to...more
The Middle District of Florida partially rejected a plaintiff’s motion for entry of final default judgment in Brown v. Care Front Funding, No. 8:22-cv-02408-VMC-JSS, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60879 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 6, 2023),...more
Three months after the Supreme Court’s landmark Facebook ruling, a growing number of trial courts have grappled with interpreting and applying the High Court’s directive. One of the more interesting decisions came out of the...more
The TCPA and other related regulations over telemarketing and “robocalling” continue to evolve at a quick pace, creating uncertainty and posing challenges for any business that contacts consumers through calling or texting....more
Restrictions on telemarketing to Florida residents are about to get tighter. Just a few months ago, in Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid, 592 U.S. ___ (2021), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that for the purposes of the Telephone...more
In 1890, Louis Brandeis wrote a seminal law review article on privacy, defining it as “the right to be left alone.” In 1991, Congress enacted the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) to reinforce that right. This month,...more
Back in 1991, when mobile phones were a luxury item weighing about two pounds and dial-up internet was getting ready to hit the market, Congress passed the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 (TCPA), with an...more
In a potentially game-changing decision, the Supreme Court today unanimously agreed that the TCPA’s definition of autodialer is narrow. Writing for the Court, Justice Sotomayor determined that “Congress’ definition of an...more
The Supreme Court’s Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid decision finally settled the confusion over what equipment constitutes an automatic telephone dialing system (a robodialer) that can violate the Telephone Consumer Protection Act...more
On April 1, 2021, in Facebook v. Duguid, 592 U.S. __(2021), the Supreme Court issued a unanimous and long-awaited ruling clarifying the definition of an “automatic telephone dialing system” (“ATDS”) under the Telephone...more
The Eleventh Circuit has spoken on the interpretation of the automatic telephone dialing system (“ATDS”) definition, and held that to qualify as an ATDS a device must have the capacity to randomly or sequentially generate...more
On May 30, 2019, the Fourth Circuit affirmed a $61,000,000 classwide judgment against Dish Network based on violations of the TCPA’s National Do Not Call Registry (“DNC”) rules committed by Dish’s outside agent Satellite...more
The TCPA is a serial litigant’s playground. Each has their own playbook, but one of the most common plays is listing a cell number online as a business phone number to lure calls from business-to-business marketers. Unwary...more
While the FCC continues to tread carefully in evaluating the thorny issue of how broadly to interpret the TCPA’s definition of “automated telephone dialing system,” particularly as it confronts proposed legislation that, if...more
On September 16, 2018, TCPAland’s own Czar, Eric J. Troutman, and the “Kingmaker” Jeremy S. Gladstone, Assistant General Counsel and TCPA Subject Matter Expert at Capital One, spoke at the MBA’s Regulatory Compliance...more
Here at TCPAland, we’ve recently mused about the potential for a new wave of TCPA litigation following recent court decisions suggesting that predictive dialers are no longer subject to the TCPA... In light of these...more
Last week, A&B Insurance and Financial LLC (A&B Insurance) agreed to pay $4.25 million to settle claims that it violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) by initiating telephone calls to consumers without prior...more