Vendors of defendant loanDepot began placing “voluminous” marketing solicitation calls in November to plaintiff Zachary Sawicki’s cellphone, in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act, said Sawicki’s first amended class action Monday (docket 2:22-cv-14425) in U.S. District Court for Southern Florida in Fort Pierce. His amended complaint drops “John Does 1-10," representing third-party agents phoning Sawicki on loanDepot’s behalf, after U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the original complaint for violating court rules against fictitious party pleading (see 2301040005). LoanDepot hasn't answered Sawicki’s allegations, but it challenged the TCPA’s constitutionality when it answered an unrelated Texas complaint (see 2212200014).
A jury trial on plaintiff Catherine Migliano’s claims that Parler violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act is to start during the two-week trial calendar beginning March 11, 2024, said an order signed Wednesday (docket 0:22-cv-61805) by U.S. District Judge Roy Altman for Southern Florida in Fort Lauderdale. His order sets a Nov. 14 deadline for completing all expert and fact discovery. Parler denies Migliano’s assertions it waived its “contractual right” to arbitrate her dispute when it failed to renew its motion to compel after she filed her amended complaint (see 2212290019).
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon for Southern Florida in Fort Pierce signed an order Thursday (docket 2:22-cv-14356) dismissing without prejudice plaintiff Gwendolyn Haviland’s Telephone Consumer Protection Act class action against e-commerce site JessicaSimpson.com. Haviland’s Oct. 18 complaint alleged she was inundated with telemarketing text messages without her consent and said the solicitations gave her no means for opting out (see 2210190040).
Make America Great Again, a political action committee headquartered in Beverly, Massachusetts, bombarded Rafael Santana and other Arizonans with an“intrusive" automated text messaging campaign to promote the candidacy of Republican Kari Lake for Arizona governor, alleged Santana’s Telephone Consumer Protection Act class action Thursday (docket 2:23-cv-00071) in U.S. District Court in Phoenix. The text messages included a video file that was automatically downloaded to Santana’s phone and contained an artificial or prerecorded voice, it said. Santana never gave MAGA “his express consent to be contacted by telephone using an artificial or prerecorded voice,” it said. The text messages didn't provide “any identifiable characteristic of the intended recipient” but were drafted so they could be “sent out en masse without variation,” the filing said. Santana doesn’t know the number of members in the proposed class but believes they number at least in the thousands, it said, if not tens-of-thousands. Efforts to reach the PAC for comment Friday were unsuccessful. Lake lost the Nov. 8 election to Democrat Katie Hobbs by 17,000 votes.
Vintage Stock removed to U.S. District Court for Eastern Missouri in St. Louis the Dec. 4 class action (docket 4:23-cv-42) in which plaintiffs Sheila and Dennis Thompson alleged the home entertainment retailer violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and related Missouri state law by sending unsolicited text messages. The defendant doesn't admit to any of the allegations in the complaint, nor does it waive any defenses that may be available, including plaintiffs’ failure to state a claim, said the Wednesday notice of removal.
Plaintiff Jamil Hindi’s first amended complaint Wednesday (docket 0:22-cv-62219) alleging Modani violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act deletes the allegation in his original Nov. 28 complaint that accused the furniture retailer also of Florida Telephone Solicitation Act wrongdoing. This after defendant Modani’s Dec. 30 motion to dismiss Hindi’s FTSA claims on grounds that the statute is unconstitutional for restricting First Amendment speech (see 2301030038). Hindi’s filing of his first amended complaint prompted U.S. District Judge William Dimitrouleas for Southern Florida in Fort Lauderdale to sign an order Thursday denying the motion to dismiss as moot. Hours after the judge’s order, Hindi and Modani filed a joint notice of settlement with the court, asserting they were now “in the process of finalizing the terms of the settlement.” They asked the court to vacate all pending deadlines and to allow them 60 days to file a stipulation of dismissal with prejudice.
Plaintiff Christopher Atanasoff and Wells Fargo Bank reached agreement to refer Atanasoff’s Telephone Consumer Protection Act dispute to binding arbitration, said their joint motion and stipulation Monday (docket 3:22-cv-01698) in U.S. District Court for Southern California in San Diego. They asked that Atanasoff’s action be stayed in its entirety until the arbitration process is complete. Atanasoff alleged Wells Fargo phoned him more than 60 times to collect an old credit card debt after receiving a cease and desist from his lawyer (see 2211210012).
Plaintiff Thomas Gebka wrongly seeks to hold State Farm liable for calls it didn't make that he claims violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, said State Farm Friday in a memorandum of law (docket 1:22-cv-05546) in support of its motion to dismiss Gebka’s amended complaint. Gebka “fails to allege any facts to support any vicarious liability theory that could hold State Farm liable for those calls,” it said. In other previous litigation, he attributed some of the calls alleged against State Farm to Allstate, the memo said. He also “invited the balance of the calls, ostensibly to seek insurance quotes from State Farm independent contractor agents,” it said. As a result, Gebka “fails to establish the requisite standing to sue State Farm,” it said.
Kohl’s is the latest Telephone Consumer Protection Act defendant to challenge the statute’s constitutionality. Carson City, Nevada, consumer Mary Graehl alleges the retailer inundated her with “harassing” debt collection calls on her Kohl's credit card account (see [Ref:2211140063). But the damages she seeks violate the 14th Amendment’s due process clause, and constitute excessive fines in violation of the Eighth Amendment, said the retailer’s answer Friday (docket 2:22-cv-01341) in U.S. District Court for Eastern Wisconsin in Milwaukee. Granting Graehl’s demand for damages “would result in unjust enrichment,” it said. Graehl hasn't alleged “she suffered any particularized and concrete injury, whether tangible or intangible, as a result of any contact made” by Kohl’s in connection with her Kohl’s charge account, said the retailer. Graehl also consented to be contacted by Kohl’s under the terms of her card member agreement, obviating her claims for relief, it said.
Marijuana dispensary Gage Cannabis continued “bombarding” the cellphone of a Michigan resident with unsolicited telemarketing text messages, despite her numerous attempts to opt out, alleged her Telephone Consumer Protection Act class action (docket 1:23-cv-00019) Thursday in U.S. District Court for Western Michigan. At no point did Nicole Sapphire of Kalamazoo County give Gage “her express written consent to be contacted,” the complaint said. To the extent that Gage thought it had “express consent” to contact her for telemarketing purposes, that consent was “expressly revoked” when she responded “stop” to each of the text messages, said the complaint. It seeks injunctive relief to halt Gage’s “illegal conduct,” which resulted in “the invasion of privacy, harassment, aggravation, and disruption of the daily life of thousands of individuals,” it said. Gage didn’t comment Friday.