Medley v. Dish Network, LLC, Case No. 8:16-cv-3534-36TBM, 2018 WL 4092120 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 27, 2018)
Joining a host of courts across the county, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida recently ruled that contractual prior express consent to be called cannot be unilaterally revoked. The basis for the Court's holding was that Plaintiff entered into an Agreement with Defendant, incorporating a Customer Agreement providing that:
By signing below, you authorize [Defendant], and any debt collection agency or debt collection attorney hired by [Defendant], to contact ...
Harris v. Navient Solutions, LLC, No. 3:15-cv-546, 2018 WL 3748155 (D. Conn. Aug. 7, 2018)
Plaintiff signed promissory notes to secure student loans in which she provided her telephone number, agreed to update Defendant if her number changed and to the following clause:
"This Note may be modified only if you put the modification in writing and the modification is agreed to by any borrower or cosigner . . . I understand that you may use automated telephone dialing equipment or an artificial or prerecorded voice message to contact me in connection with this loan or loan application. You may ...
Few v. Receivables Performances Management, No. 1:17-cv-2038-KOB, 2018 WL 3772863 (N.D. Ala. Aug. 9, 2018)
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. §227 (TCPA), prohibits calls to cellular telephones using an Automatic Telephone Dialing System (ATDS), artificial or prerecorded voice. But calls made with prior express consent do not violate the Act. Plaintiff alleged Defendant violated the Act by calling her cell phone at least 184 times using an ATDS after she revoked prior express consent to be called. Defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that Plaintiff could ...
Roberts v. Paypal, Inc., No. 13-16304 (9th Cir. Oct. 20, 2015) Pending before the Court was the trial court's Order granting summary judgment in Defendant's favor concluding that Plaintiff provided "prior express consent" to receive text messages from Defendant by knowingly providing his phone number. The Court of Appeals rejected Plaintiff's argument that his consent was limited, stating "[u]nder the FCC's interpretation, Roberts expressly consented to text messages from PayPal when he provided PayPal his cell phone number. Even if Roberts believed that PayPal would only ...
Whaley v. T-Mobile, USA, Inc., No. 13-31-DLB-JGW, 2013 WL 5155342 (E.D. Ky. Sept. 12, 2013) Plaintiff opened a cell phone account with Defendant. Terms and conditions of the account included an arbitration provision in bold letters. While Plaintiff was allowed an opportunity to opt out of the arbitration procedures by calling a 1-800 number within 30 days of activating service, he did not exercise this option. According to the Complaint, Defendant later began calling Plaintiff to collect debt from a third party. He filed suit alleging violations of the TCPA and Defendant moved to ...
Thrasher-Lyon v. CCS Commercial LLC, No. 11 C 04473, 2012 WL 5389722 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 2, 2012) Pending before the court was Defendants' Motion to Reconsider summary judgment granted in the named Plaintiff's favor, and alternative request for certification of the summary judgment decision for interlocutory appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). Rejecting Defendant's Motion to Reconsider, the court did, however, certify its order for interlocutory appeal. Specifically, the court concluded that its summary judgment decision decided two controlling issues of law: (1) the ...
Meyer v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, No. 11-56600, 2012 WL 4840814 (9th Cir. Oct. 12, 2012) Pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit was the district court's: (1) Provisional certification of a class consisting of individuals with cell phone numbers that Defendant did not obtain from either a creditor or the class member, where the cell phone number had a California area code, or Defendant's records identified the class member as living in California; and (2) Preliminary injunction order restraining Defendant from using its dialer to place calls to cell ...
Buslepp v. B & B Entertainment, LLC, No. 12-60089-CIV, 2012 WL 4761509 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 5, 2012) Plaintiff's claims in this purported class action arose out of a contention that he received unsolicited commercial text message solicitations from an adult night club. Both Plaintiff and Defendant moved for summary judgment. Defendant argued that its Rule 68 Offer of a $6,000 Judgment mooted Plaintiff's claims. The court rejected this argument for two reasons: (1) The offer was silent with respect to Plaintiff's claim for injunctive relief, and, as such, did not afford full relief; and ...
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 (TCPA) is a federal statute that was enacted in 1991 to address concerns relating to telemarketing/solicitation practices. It amended the Communications Act of 1934, and has been characterized by Manuel H. Newberger, in FDCPA Updated On The TCPA, Time-Barred Debt and Voice Mail Messages, as “one of the new weapons of choice of those suing debt collectors.” But it has far broader application. For example, it has entangled not only debt collectors but also other businesses ranging from local businesses to national banks and ...
Thrasher-Lyon v. CCS Commercial, LLC, No. 11 C 04472, 2012 WL 3835089 (E.D. Ill. Sept. 4, 2012) Pending before the Court was the question of whether "prior express consent" under Section 227(b)(1)(A) of the TCPA means consent to be contacted in general, or consent to be contacted via "robo-calls." By way of background, Plaintiff, who was involved in a car accident, gave her cell phone number to the driver whose car she hit. The driver's insurer called Plaintiff for information about the accident. During the call, the agent asked Plaintiff for the best way to reach her. She said the number ...