As the TCPAWorld reported not long ago, a Magistrate Judge in South Florida recently held that consent obtained in a class action settlement was irrevocable—even against unnamed class members—under the doctrine of "Good Reyes." Specifically, the Magistrate Judge assigned to the case found that contractual consent is not revocable where it is a bargained-for term of a contract.

The Plaintiff challenged the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation to the district court, and it did not go well. On Wednesday of this week, the district court overruled all objections and adopted the recommendation, dismissing the case. See Lucoff v. Navient Solutions, CASE NO. 18-CIV-60743-RAR, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133577 (S.D. Fl. Aug. 7, 2019).


In affirming the recommended dismissal, the district court explicitly stated it was “persuaded” by the Good Reyes decision that under common law, “Plaintiff’s consent was irrevocable, and any attempt to revoke his prior consent was ineffective…” In reaching this conclusion, the district court distinguished cases where the calls at issue were not within the scope of the consent provision as inapposite.

The district court also concluded that the Plaintiff had again consented by allowing the re-submission of his phone number to the servicer.

So there you go TCPAWorld—no revocation of contractual consent permitted in the Southern District of Florida.

Pass it on.



Editor's note: This article is provided through a partnership between insideARM and Squire Patton Boggs LLP, which provides a steady stream of timely, insightful and entertaining takes on of the ever-evolving, never-a-dull-moment Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Squire Patton Boggs LLP—and all insideARM articles—are protected by copyright. All rights are reserved.