In Harrier v. Verizon Wireless Personal Communications LP, 2012 WL 3655355 (M.D.Fla. 2012), Judge Moody addressed a petition to arbitrate a TCPA claim.  Plaintiff sued Verizon for emailing her to collect a debt after she received a bankruptcy discharge on Verizon’s debt.  Verizon moved to compel arbitration.  Judge Moody denied the petition, holding:

Harrier alleges that despite the bankruptcy discharge, Verizon called Harrier regarding the alleged debt on two occasions and e-mailed her regarding the alleged debt on one occasion. Harrier alleges that these communications violated the FCCPA and the TCPA. Verizon now moves to compel arbitration and stay the proceedings based on arbitration clauses contained in the agreements between Harrier and Verizon.Harrier does not dispute that the agreements contained arbitration clauses; she argues that the agreements are no longer valid in light of the bankruptcy discharge. The Court agrees.  The bankruptcy proceeding discharged the Verizon debt. And under 11 U.S.C. § 524(c) the agreement between “a holder of a claim and the debtor” is enforceable only to the extent that certain conditions, such as reaffirmation of the agreement, are met. Verizon neglects to address the bankruptcy discharge in its motion. And, although the Court is unaware of a case relevant to this particular factual situation, the Court concludes that the agreements between the parties, in the absence of a reaffirmation agreement, are “completely discharged and invalidated.” In re Jones, 6 B.R. 336, 338 (Bankr.S.D.Ohio 1980).