Contractual provisions requiring consumers to bring claims in arbitration must be carefully worded to ensure they encompass all claims, including those asserted under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. A recent decision by the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Abedi v. New Age Med. Clinic PA, No. 18-14680-KM-SCM, 2019 U.S.
Earlier this week, the Fourth Circuit struck down a provision of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) that exempted government-backed debts from the statute’s prohibition on automated calls to cellular telephones. According to the Court in American Association of Political Consultants, Inc., et al v. FCC, the debt-collection exemption does not pass strict scrutiny
On April 12, the United States District Court for the Southern District of California upheld a magistrate judge’s discovery order requiring the production of settlement agreements containing confidentiality provisions.
In Kenneth J. Moser v. Health Insurance Innovations, Inc., consumer plaintiff Kenneth Moser brought putative class action claims against Health Insurance Innovations (“HIIQ”)
The Eastern District of Pennsylvania concluded that an admitted professional litigant stated a claim under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act when he received the defendant’s telemarketing calls on his cell phone. The determinative factor was lack of allegations and evidence that the plaintiff used the phone for the sole purpose of bringing TCPA lawsuits. A
In Henderson v. United Student Aid Funds, Inc., the Ninth Circuit recently reversed a decision by the District Court for the Southern District of California holding that a lender could not be held vicariously liable for the actions of the debt collection companies that had been hired by its loan servicer.
The plaintiff in Henderson
On April 19, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) released its agenda for its May Open Commission Meeting scheduled for May 9, 2019. Once again, however, there is no agenda item regarding the FCC’s highly anticipated rulemaking under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). The FCC’s silence on this topic means yet another month will pass
On April 3, the Northern District of West Virginia issued an order denying Monitronics International, Inc.’s motion for summary judgment on multiple Telephone Consumer Protection Act grounds. In re Monitronics Int’l, Inc., No. 1:13-md-02493-JPB (N.D. W.Va. April 3, 2019). Monitronics sought summary judgment, claiming there was no evidence that it was the seller under
On April 3, Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel told a House subcommittee that a robocall enforcement unit should be added to the Federal Communications Commission. Highlighting that consumers receive more than 5 billion robocalls a month (up from 2 million calls a month at the beginning of the Trump administration), Rosenworcel stated that “it’s time for the
The District Court in the Northern District of Illinois, in Spiegel v. EngageTel Inc. (N.D. Ill. Mar. 29, 2019), granted summary judgment in favor of defendants EngageTel Inc. and its principal, Dennis Carlson, on certain claims, but left a claim under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act remaining. The District Court’s decision is significant
Partners Virginia B. Flynn, Chad R. Fuller, and Alan D. Wingfield of Troutman Sanders LLP are mentioned in a March 22 Law360 article regarding the United States Supreme Court’s decision to grant review of PDR Network v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, a Telephone Consumer Protection Act class action.
PDR Network is a company that