Lazar Shcherb v. Angi Homeservices, Inc., 19-cv-367 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 25, 2019)
Plaintiff filed suit against various corporate defendants alleging that they used an automatic telephone dialing system (ATDS) to call his cell phone in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) contending that, “[u]pon information and belief,” “when Defendants made these calls, [they] used equipment that had the capacity to store or produce telephone numbers . . . using a random or sequential number generator and/or a predictive dialer” with the capacity to dial such ...
Brady v. Basic Research, L.L.C., 2:13-cv-7169 (SFJ) (ARL) (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 3, 2016) The day after Campbell Ewald Co. v. Gomez was decided by the United States Supreme Court, Defendants moved for permission to deposit funds with the Clerk of Court "consistent with the Rule 68 offer of judgment that [they] previously made to Plaintiffs." The Court noted that by seeking permission to deposit the amount of their offer of judgment with the Clerk of Court, Defendants are attempting to moot the individual claims of Plaintiffs, thereby defeating the individual Plaintiffs' attempt to have a ...
"Plaintiff's claim clearly falls within the scope of the Card Agreement's arbitration clause, which provides that 'all Claims are subject to ...
Bank v. Sparks Energy Holdings, LLC, Civ. No. 4:11-cv-4082, 2012 WL 4097749 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 13, 2012) Plaintiff, a citizen of the State of New York, filed a purported class action lawsuit in Texas against Defendant. At issue was an allegedly unsolicited voice message Plaintiff received on his residential phone line stating: "Hello, this is [omission in the original] pertaining to your current electric bill with Con Edison, reference number 42648967. We are now able to offer you a lower rate on your electricity bill through the recent government deregulation. Press five to be ...