On August 26, 2015, we wrote about a decision out of the Northern District of California, Luna v. Shac, LLC, Case No. 5:14-cv-00607-HRL, 2015 WL 4941781 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 19, 2015), in which the defendant prevailed in defeating a TCPA class action using a “human intervention” based defense. Now, just two weeks later, another
TCPA Defendant Wins With “Human Intervention” Defense in California
A recent decision out of the Northern District of California creates new hope for TCPA defendants. In Luna v. Shac, LLC, Case No. 5:14-cv-00607-HRL, 2015 WL 4941781 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 19, 2015), defendant Shac, LLC won summary judgment by arguing that the web-based application the company used to send promotional text messages could not
Upcoming Webinar! Retailers: How to Reduce Your Risk of a Class Action Lawsuit
On Thursday, September 10 at 12:00 p.m. Central, Seyfarth attorneys Michael Burns, Robert Milligan and Jason Stiehl will present the second installment of our 2015 Class Action Webinar Series. Presenters will discuss the climate to help retailers avoid becoming targets of litigation. This webinar will provide an overview of the current class action lawsuit landscape
New FCC Order Spurs Legal Challenges
The Association of Credit and Collection Professionals (ACA) swiftly-filed a petition for review of the FCC’s July 10, 2015 Declaratory Ruling and Order (FCC 15-72) in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The petition challenges the FCC’s treatment of automatic dialing systems, predictive dialers and its definition of prior express consent. Similar
The Positives and Negatives of the FCC’s Recent Omnibus Order on the TCPA
On Friday, July 10, 2015, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued an omnibus, Declaratory Ruling and Order (FCC Ruling) seeking to clarify certain ambiguities in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). The TCPA was enacted in 1991 with the purpose of protecting consumers’ privacy rights against unwanted robocalls.
Background
Briefly, an individual is liable under
You Are Invited! Upcoming Webinar: Hot Topics and Trends in Consumer Class Action Law
On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at 12:00 p.m. Central, Jason P. Stiehl, Giovanna A. Ferrari and Jordan P. Vick will present the first installment of the 2015 Class Action Webinar series. They will provide a summary of key decisions from 2014, identify key trends for companies to watch for in 2015, as well as practical
https://www.consumerclassdefense.com/2014/12/1006/
Eleventh Circuit Rules Holds That Rule 68 Offers of Judgment to Named Plaintiffs Do Not Moot Their Ability to Represent a Putative Class.
As many of our readers are aware, one strategy defense counsel use to dispose of a putative class action at an early stage in the litigation is to make an individual offer
Court Denies Out-Of-The-Gate Motions For Class Certification Of TCPA Complaints Based On Lack Of Numerosity
Introduction
Following the Seventh Circuit’s decision in Damasco v. Clearwire Corp., 662 F.3d 891 (7th Cir. 2011), Plaintiff’s counsel typically file motions for class certification along with their Complaints to prevent Defendants from using Rule 68 offers of judgment to “moot” the individual claims of their class representatives and derail the class action.
The
Nack v. Walburg: The United States Supreme Court Denies Petition for Certiorari of Eighth Circuit Decision Leaving Open Many Issues Regarding the FCC’s Authority Related to the TCPA
As you may recall, on May 22, 2013, we reported on the Eighth Circuit’s opinion in Nack v. Walburg, Case No. 11-1460 (8th Cir. May 21, 2012), an opinion in which the court raised the specter of constitutionality issues in TCPA class actions. However, the Eighth Circuit ultimately did not decide those key issues,
Text Spamming Class Action Culminated in Summary Judgment Because of Consumer’s Prior Consent
The United States District Court for the Central District of California recently ruled in Shaya Baird v. Sabre Inc., that a consumer who voluntarily provides a phone number in the process of completing a transaction thereby gives express consent for purposes of the consent defense to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”). NO.2:13-cv-00999-SVW-JRP, 2014