Consumer Finance

In Boise v. ACE USA, Inc., 2015 WL 4077433, at *3-4 (S.D.Fla.,2015), Judge Cooke found that a TCPA Plaintiff had Article III standing, and that his case was not mooted by a Rule 68 offer.    The District Court found that 11th Circuit precedent bound it on the question of Article III standing. Palm Beach Golf Center–Boca, Inc. v. Sarris, 781… Read More

In Imhoff Investment, L.L.C. v. Alfoccino, Inc., 2015 WL 4079438,(6th Cir. 2015), the Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit found Article III standing for a TCPA class plaintiff, and imposed direct, rather than vicarious, liability on a company on whose behalf an unsolicited fax was sent.  The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals summarized its holding as follows: Plaintiff Avio, Inc. alleges… Read More

In Sacchi v. Care One, LLC, 2015 WL 3966034 (D.N.J.,2015), Judge Wigenton dismissed a TCPA class action when discovery revealed that Plaintiff's counsel was the primary user of the telephone number at issue. On February 3, 2014, Plaintiff, John Sacchi, filed a putative class-action complaint against Defendant Care One alleging that Care One maintained an illegal telephone solicitation practice in violation… Read More

In Jensen v. Pressler & Pressler, 2015 WL 3953754, at *1 (C.A.3 (N.J.),2015), the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that the FDCPA's prohibition against false statements requires materiality, and that such standard is baked into the "least sophisticated consumer" rule.  The facts were as follows. Paula Jensen defaulted on a Bank of America credit card, and her debt… Read More

Two articles on the TCPA authored by Severson attorneys were published today in the Consumer Finance Law Quarterly Report as part of the Conference on Consumer Finance's TCPA Symposium.  The titles and citations for the articles are Staying TCPA Cases under the Primary Jurisdiction Doctrine, 68 Con. Fin. L. Q. Rep. 312 (2015) and Certification of Class Actions under the Telephone Consumer… Read More

In Charvat v. Travel Services, 2015 WL 3917046, at *4-5 (N.D.Ill., 2015), Judge Wood affirmed the Magistrate Judge's sua sponte imposition of relevancy objections to deny discovery toward a serial TCPA Plaintiff. RCL contends that Charvat's tax returns are relevant to show that he derives substantial income from TCPA litigation and that his motivation for filing this action is financial gain rather… Read More

In Williams v. Bank of America, Nat. Ass'n, 2015 WL 3843251, at *2-4 (D.S.C.,2015), Judge Harwell denied a TCPA Defendant's motion to dismiss. The Court finds Plaintiff has alleged sufficient facts to state a claim under the TCPA. Plaintiff claims Defendant began calling her cellular telephone after January 2013, and upon answering Defendant's calls, Plaintiff heard an automated message telling her… Read More

In Herrera v. AllianceOne Receivable Management, Inc., 2015 WL 3796123, at *1 (S.D.Cal.,2015), Judge Moskowitz found that a debt collector's collection of traffic fines from the wrong person were not protected by the litigation privilege, but were not subject to the Rosenthal Act. Defendant was assigned to collect several unpaid traffic fines by the San Diego County Superior Court assessed against Gilberto… Read More

In Gold Group Enterprises, Inc. v. Bull, 2015 WL 3794719  (D.N.J.,2015), Judge Hammer granted in part and denied in part a Motion to Quash a TCPA subpoena issued to a third party service provider.  Petitioner Gold Mobile was not a party to the litigation. According to Gold Mobile's Executive Vice President, Gold Mobile provided various technological platforms and services that allowed companies to… Read More

In Panacci v. A1 Solar Power, Inc., 2015 WL 3750112, at *3 (N.D.Cal., 2015), Magistrate Judge Spero refused to strike TCPA class action allegations at the pleadings stage under Defendant's argument that Plaintiff had pleaded an impermissible "fail-safe" class. Defendants claim that Plaintiff's class definitions create fail-safe classes. . . .Plaintiff argues that its class definitions are not fail-safe because (1)… Read More

In Finley v. Dynamic Recovery Solutions LLC, 2015 WL 3750140 (N.D. Cal. 2015), Judge Henderson denied Defendant’s summary judgment motion as to Plaintiff’s claim that the Defendant violated the FDCPA for collecting on out-of-statute debt. The Ninth Circuit has not yet determined whether a threat of litigation is required for such a debt collection letter to be actionable. Two cases… Read More

In Leon v. Target Corporation, 2015 WL 3738583 (M.D. Pa. 2015), Judge Caputo refused to apply the Primary Jurisdiction Doctrine to stay a TCPA action. On April 17, 2015, Target filed its Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Leon’s Complaint. (Doc. 19.) Target then filed the instant motion to stay this action (Doc. 20) because “the issue of revocation of consent… Read More

A copy of the FCC's Release can be found here:  FCC TCPA News Release.  A transcript of the proceedings and the panel's statements can be found here:   FCC TCPA Transcript 6.18.15 Read More

In Sook v. Nielsen Company (US), LLC, 2015 WL 3688781, at *1-2 (M.D.Fla.,2015), Judge Kovachevich stayed a TCPA case under the Primary Jurisdiction Doctrine. On February 9, 2015, Plaintiff filed its complaint, alleging that Defendant sent Plaintiff thousands of unwanted text messages in violation of 47 U.S.C. § 227, The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”). (Doc. 1 at 1). Specifically, Count… Read More

In Provo v. Rady Children's Hospital-San Diego, 2015 WL 3648845, at *2-3 (S.D.Cal.,2015), Judge Miller granted in part and denied in part a debt collector's motion to dismiss an FDCPA plaintiff's claim based on collection of a medical debt. Judge Miller found that the letter did not unlawfully seek to collect prejudgment interest without a judgment. Plaintiffs contend that a debt… Read More

In Lees v. Anthem Ins. Companies Inc., 2015 WL 3645208, at *1 (E.D.Mo.,2015), Judge Limbaugh gave final approval to Anthem's settlement of a TCPA class action, described as follows: The Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 et seq. (“TCPA”) prohibits making automated telephone calls to cellular telephones without the “prior express consent” of the recipient. Plaintiff alleges that defendant… Read More

In Montgomery v. GCFS, Inc., 2015 WL 3653314, at *1-2 (Cal.App. 1 Dist., 2015), the Court of Appeal affirmed dismissal of a Rosenthal Act claim premised on an alleged prohibition against assignment of a debt from a CFL holder to an unlicensed entity.  I've changed the order of the opinion somewhat for brevity here; but, the facts were as follows: In… Read More

In Klein v. Law Offices of D. Scott Carruthers, 2015 WL 3626946, at *5 (N.D.Cal. 2015), Judge Breyer was called on to address a Plaintiff's counsel's request for attorneys' fees under the Rosenthal Act.  Plaintiff's counsel sought discovery of defense counsel's billing records to support Plaintiff's counsel's fee application and to refute the Defense counsel's argument that the Plaintiff's counsel's… Read More

The CFPB issued its Final Rule today to supervise larger participant nonbank automotive finance companies, which is largely unchanged from their September 2014 proposal.  The Final Rule retains the 10,000 transaction threshold, meaning that nonbank auto finance companies that make, acquire, or refinance 10,000 or more loans or leases in a year will come under CFPB supervision and enforcement and… Read More

In Jacobson v. Persolve, LLC, No. 14-CV-00735-LHK, 2015 WL 3523696, at *10 (N.D. Cal. June 4, 2015), Judge Koh granted, in part, class certification in an FDCPA class action despite the fact that the FDCPA's $500,000 penalty cap would result in deminimus recover to the large number of individual class members. In opposition, Defendants do not dispute that individual class members… Read More