In the aftermath of
Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants, Inc. the Supreme Court decision from July that held the TCPA’s government-debt exception to be an unconstitutional content-based restriction on speech the country’s district courts cannot agree on whether they may adjudicate TCPA claims alleging conduct that transpired during the life of the exception (
i.e., during the period from November 2, 2015 to July 6, 2020). Click here to see our collection of posts on this issue, which we have been following closely.
Recently, the Northern District of Florida weighed in on the issue, concluding that it
did have subject-matter jurisdiction over TCPA conduct that, according to the complaint, occurred between October 2019 and February 2020. In the case,
Tuesday, October 20, 2020
In
Creasy v. Charter Commc’ns, Inc.,[1] a federal judge ruled that autodialed calls and text messages made during the past five years are not actionable under the TCPA. The logic in this novel order constitutes a bold, dispositive line of attack for TCPA defendants facing allegations for calls made during the last five years.
The fact pattern in
Creasy is typical of most TCPA cases. The putative class plaintiffs alleged that Charter Communications violated § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii) of the TCPA by sending at least 130 autodialed calls and texts without consent. All but one of the violations allegedly occurred between 2015 and July 6, 2020, when the government-debt exception remained in place.[2]
Wednesday, January 20, 2021
As we have reported on here, here, here, and here, a growing number of district courts are issuing opinions addressing whether they have subject matter jurisdiction over TCPA claims alleging robocall violations that occurred when the government debt exception invalidated by
Barr v. APPC, 140 S. Ct. 2335 (2020), was part of the statute. The Eastern District of California recently added to this line of cases, joining courts that have held that “the TCPA remains enforceable, at least against non-government debt collectors, as to calls made between November 2015 and July 6, 2020.”
See Stoutt v Travis Credit Union, No. 2:20-cv-01280, 2021 WL 99636, at 3 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 12, 2021).
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
Will anything stop the continuing barrage of class action lawsuits under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA)? In 2020, TCPA lawsuits remained one of the most commonly-filed type of class action in federal courts across the country, and all signs indicate that the trend will continue in the year ahead. Yet potential changes loom on the horizon. The United States Supreme Court is poised to issue a decision that could dramatically impact hundreds of pending cases involving alleged autodialers and alter the TCPA landscape for good. New leadership at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) could revise or clarify TCPA rules, and courts across the country continue to grapple with various issues regarding the scope and potency of the statute. Here, we discuss the TCPA Top 5 issues for 2021.