The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina recently rejected a defendant’s arguments that its contract with the plaintiff did not allow revocation of prior express consent under the TCPA, and that the defendant’s telephone communication system was not an “automatic telephone dialing system.”
This article is republished with permission from Michael Storz, and Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP. It originally appeared on www.tcpablog.com. With the TCPA dockets remaining active going into 2016, we decided to put together a list of notable petitions pending at the FCC. The following list provides details on most petitions that the FCC has yet to […]
Portfolio Recovery Associates will pay $18 million to resolve multidistrict litigation accusing the debt collection company of violating the TCPA by making autodialed phone calls to consumers without their consent, according to documents filed Monday in California federal court.
In a putative class action for alleged violation of the TCPA, and notwithstanding the recent ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States inCampbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York recently granted a defendant’s request to enter judgment in the consumer’s favor providing all relief sought only by the plaintiff in his individual capacity.
This case provides interesting perspective on how a settlement was apparently reached fairly quickly and efficiently in a TCPA case. Also of note is the fairly broad definition of the Settlement Class.
The CFPB intends for its consent orders to set industry-wide precedents. In March 2016, CFPB Director Richard Cordray referred to consent orders as a guide “to all participants in the marketplace to avoid similar violations and make an immediate effort to correct any such improper practices,” telling the Consumer Bankers Association that any company not following the precedents set by the CFPB’s consent orders is committing “compliance malpractice.”
This article is republished with permission from Michael Stortz, and Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP. It originally appeared on www.tcpablog.com. In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in Campbell-Ewald v. Gomez, the Ninth Circuit has held that an offer tendering complete relief, conditioned on the dismissal of a putative class action, is insufficient to moot the action […]
This post originally appeared on the blog of Klein Moynihan and is re-published here with permission. The article was co-authored by David O. Klein and Joshua Wueller. The Federal Communications Commission (the “FCC” or “Commission”) is currently seeking comment on whether it should establish a bright-line rule for telephone lines in residential homes that are used for business […]
An Order granting partial summary judgment in favor of a plaintiff in a TCPA case against Navient and its affiliate, Student Assistance Corporation, was entered on April 6. The summary judgment order translates to an award of over $360,000, with the potential for additional liability once the case proceeds to trial on the issue of whether the defendants should be liable for treble damages under the statute. The case presents several interesting facts and issues.
The Silver case is important to the entire ARM industry for a number of reasons. Any positive decision in a TCPA case is a good decision and should be reviewed. However, the case is especially important to that segment of the ARM industry that collects on federal government-backed student loans.