On April 1, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision in
Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid, adopting a narrow autodialer standard under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). In siding with Facebook, the Supreme Court sets a precedent that should drastically reduce the volume of TCPA autodialer litigation and help to protect financial institutions from new suits being filed against them. Join Michael Goodman as he explains what the ruling means for the industry, as well as what questions may still be left unanswered.
These 30-minute mini-webinars feature Hudson Cook attorneys presenting on a variety of compliance topics, including auto finance, debt collection practices, mortgage and housing, credit reporting, and more. They take place at 2:00 pm Eastern on the second Tuesday of each month.
Judge says frequent TCPA suit filer lacks legal standing to amend claims against energy company pennrecord.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from pennrecord.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Will Unanimous Supremes Stem the TCPA Tide?
With a ‘random’ decision, SCOTUS reshapes the landscape of telemarketing law
What a Long Strange Trip It’s Been
Back in July of last year, we offered a summary of the sometimes-bumpy appellate terrain relating to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).
The number of TCPA cases exploded in the wake of a 2015 Federal Communications Commission order that defined automatic telephone dialing systems (ATDS) in a broad fashion. As we said then, referring to two Chamber of Commerce petitions protesting the order:
“The [TCPA] defines ATDS to mean “equipment which has the capacity to store or produce telephone numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator; and to dial such numbers.” The petition states that the Omnibus Order broadly defined “capacity” so that devices that might be modified in the future to store or generate numbers and dial them were subject to TCPA litigation, even if they were not cu
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Checkers, Consumers Get TCPA Deal Approved On 2nd Try
Law360 (April 14, 2021, 5:59 PM EDT) An Illinois federal judge on Wednesday granted a group of consumers second attempt to finalize a settlement in their lawsuit claiming Checkers Drive-in Restaurants Inc. violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, after a supplemental notice plan led to a nearly 500% claim increase.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Sunil Harjani said he was confident the deal consumer Madeleine Yates reached with Checkers and Vibes Media LLC over allegedly unwanted text messages was fair, adequate and reasonable. That s particularly true after the parties sent text messages directly to qualifying class members to increase the number of claims in their deal, he said.
Spokeo v. Robins, which DWT has written about previously.
Spokeo held that plaintiffs must establish a concrete injury even in the context of a statutory violation. The named plaintiff in that case alleged that Spokeo had violated the FCRA by publishing incorrect information about him on the internet and harming his employment prospects.
While the Ninth Circuit had found the violation of a statutory right sufficient to confer standing, the U.S. Supreme Court disagreed, holding that a bare procedural violation, such as an incorrect zip code,
1 could not qualify as a concrete injury. In making this determination, the Court considered Congress s intent to elevate an injury to a concrete harm, and whether the alleged injury bears a close relationship to a harm that has traditionally been recognized in common law.