A California district court issued a ruling in a debt collection-related Telephone Consumer Protection Act case that clarifies whether a debtor with multiple accounts revokes consent for all of those accounts when speaking to a creditor or collector about just one of the accounts.
The case, Henry Mendoza v. Allied Interstate LLC, et al.,
In Frank v. Cannabis & Glass, LLC, No. 2:19-cv-00250-SAB (E.D. Wash. Oct. 1, 2019), the federal court for the Eastern District of Washington held that a minor role in a causal chain was not sufficient to “make” a call for purposes of liability under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
This case arose after Roberta
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act, while permitting personal liability against officers and directors, continues to shield related corporate entities from liability. The same corporate formalities that impose liability on officers and directors ironically work to shield corporate entities from the same liability.
In Holland v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, plaintiff Steven W. Holland sued
California court vindicates HCI (once again) as not covered by TCPA, but finds 70 calls over four months potentially harassing
A recent California decision touched upon two recurring sources of lawsuits against debt collectors: whether calls are subject to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and whether the sheer number of calls can constitute harassment barred
It is common knowledge that class action lawsuits are expensive. And we know that many consumer class action lawsuits are filed without a proper class representative or with a class that is otherwise ill-defined, legally deficient, or unascertainable. Other purported Telephone Consumer Protection Act class action lawsuits present potentially dispositive issues from the outset, such
On September 30, the District of Nevada dismissed a plaintiff’s class claim under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act but permitted her individual claim to proceed. In Whittum v. Acceptance Now West LLC, plaintiff Roxanne Whittum alleged that Acceptance Now placed multiple calls to her using an automatic telephone dialing system (“ATDS”)
Last week, a United States District Court in Washington rejected a proposed TCPA class settlement in part because the class definition included an impermissible characterization of the disputed term of art: automatic telephone dialing system (“ATDS”). A copy of the Order is available here.
This TCPA class action involved allegations that the defendant made
One of the most ambitious (i.e., bad) arguments ever made by a defendant in a TCPA case was rejected by the Western District of New York in Gerrard v. Acara Sol. Inc., 1:18-cv-1041, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108038, 2019 WL 2647758 (W.D.N.Y. June 27, 2019). Acara Solutions argued their text messages with
A federal judge in Alabama has approved a putative class-action settlement in the amount of $1.15 million against Compass Bank to resolve a case brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) on behalf of non-customers who received unsolicited auto-dialer survey calls from the bank.
The case, Robert Hossfield, and all others similarly situated, vs.
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act discriminates between types of calls based on content: persons calling to seek collection of federal debts get an exemption from TCPA requirements, while other types of calls do not. Federal courts have split over whether this discrimination is constitutional, setting up in the long term a possible Supreme Court