Posts tagged illinois.

Fulton Dental, LLC v. Bisco, Inc., No. 15-c-11038 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 2, 2016).

Plaintiff dental practice filed a class action lawsuit relating to a fax it received, contending that the fax violated the TCPA. Defendant made a settlement offer of $3,005 plus costs, which Plaintiff rejected. The next day, Defendant moved to deposit $3,600 with the Court under Rule 67, taking the position that $3,600 exceeded what Plaintiff could ever hope to recover because it assumed maximum liability: (1) $3,005 for two willful violations of the TCPA- one for sending the unwanted fax, and one for failing ...

Telephone Science Corp. v. Asset Recovery Solutions, LLC, No. 15-cv-5182, 2016 WL 4179150 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 8, 2016)

Plaintiff operates a service called "Nomorobo" designed to help consumers avoid incoming robocalls by analyzing calls made to its "honeypot" numbers using a specialized algorithm enabling it to distinguish between auto and manual dialed calls. Plaintiff filed suit against Defendant alleging that it received 12,240 robocalls between March 2014, and February, 2016, answering 747 of them. Plaintiff claimed to incur a $0.0075 charge for all calls answered ...

Wellington Homes, Inc. v. West Dundee China Palace Restaurant, No. 2-12-0740 (Ill App. 2d March 13, 2013) Plaintiff filed suit, placing at issue allegedly unsolicited faxes sent in violation of the TCPA. At issue was the applicable statute of limitations. Defendant's argued that the Illinois two-year statute governing claims brought for statutory damages governed. Plaintiff argued the federal four-year statute of limitations codified in 28 U.S.C. § 1658 governed. The trial court agreed with Plaintiff but certified the question to the appellate court. Holding that the the ...

Birchmeier v. Caribbean Cruise Line, Inc., 2012 WL 7062748 (N.D.Ill. Dec. 31, 2012) Plaintiffs filed suit alleging Defendants made or caused unsolicited calls to their cell phones in violation of the TCPA while acting under the guise of conducting a political survey to get their foot in the door to sell ocean cruises. Defendants filed Motions to Dismiss, advancing multiple arguments, all of which were rejected. For example, Defendants argued that Plaintiffs ran afoul of Rule 8 by not distinguishing the role of each Defendant. But the court held that Plaintiffs alleged Defendants ...

In re Capital One Telephone Consumer Protection Act Litigation, No. MDL 2416 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 10, 2012) Over opposition from all responding Plaintiffs, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) ordered centralization in the Northern District of Illinois of more than 30 actions asserting TCPA claims against Defendant, including adversary proceedings. The JPML's conclusion was based on the fact that the subject actions shared factual issues regarding Defendant's policies and procedures for calling, or directing its agents to call, consumers, as well as Defendant's ...

Martin v. Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless, et al., No. 12 C 5147, 2012 WL 5048854 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 18, 2012) Plaintiff entered into a wireless contract with Defendant, which he later canceled. Plaintiff sent Defendant a payment with the cancellation notice of the amount he owed under the contract as well as revocation of consent to call his cell phone number. Defendant sent Plaintiff a bill, which included an early termination fee, restocking fee, fees for services used and other taxes and charges. Plaintiff did not pay the fees, and Defendant assigned the debt to three ...

Thrasher-Lyon v. CCS Commercial, LLC, No. 11 C 04472, 2012 WL 3835089 (E.D. Ill. Sept. 4, 2012) Pending before the Court was the question of whether "prior express consent" under Section 227(b)(1)(A) of the TCPA means consent to be contacted in general, or consent to be contacted via "robo-calls." By way of background, Plaintiff, who was involved in a car accident, gave her cell phone number to the driver whose car she hit. The driver's insurer called Plaintiff for information about the accident. During the call, the agent asked Plaintiff for the best way to reach her. She said the number ...

About The TCPA Blog

Email/Comment Policy

Disclaimer

Burr
Jump to Page
Arrow icon Top

Contact Us

We use cookies to improve your website experience, provide additional security, and remember you when you return to the website. This website does not respond to "Do Not Track" signals. By clicking "Accept," you agree to our use of cookies. To learn more about how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.

Necessary Cookies

Necessary cookies enable core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility. These cookies may only be disabled by changing your browser settings, but this may affect how the website functions.


Analytical Cookies

Analytical cookies help us improve our website by collecting and reporting information on its usage. We access and process information from these cookies at an aggregate level.