The Plaintiff in Stewart v. Healthcare Revenue Recovery Group moved for summary judgment against a debt collector arguing she did not consent to calls that were deployed. Defendant argued that it had not used an automated telephone dialing system to make the calls.
In Garcia v. Case No. Pro Custom Solar LLC, the Defendant moved to dismiss a TCPA complaint’s ATDS claim. The Court held that allegations the called party encountered a click and pause at the time he answered were sufficient to state a claim.
In Wilson v. Rater8, the court agreed that the plaintiff’s TCPA claims failed as the plaintiff did not plausibly allege he was sent a text message using an ATDS. This court’s decisions highlight the evolution of how courts are casting doubt over ATDS allegations post-Duguid.
In Estate of O’Shea v. Am. Solar Sol., Inc., Case No. 3:14-cv-00894-L-RBB, the court determined that a $25.00 per claim settlement was insufficient, stating the settlement needed to take into account differences in class members.
Legal Disclaimer
You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review s (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.