Consumer Finance

In McCurley v. Royal Seas Cruises, Inc., No. 17-cv-00986-BAS-AGS, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52173 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 27, 2019), Judge Bashant certified a TCPA-telemarketing class. In the wake of Van Patten and McKesson, it is clear that the evidence Royal offers as evidence of consent "strongly affects" the Court's predominance analysis. McKesson, 896 F.3d at 932; see also Makaron, 324… Read More

In Jiminez v. Credit One Bank, N.A., No. 17 CV 2844-LTS-JLC, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53096 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 28, 2019), Judge Swain found that a LiveVox system constituted an ATDS under the TCPA. The Court next turns to the question of whether the LiveVox system at issue in this case is a predictive dialer within the meaning of the FCC's… Read More

In Jaras v. Equifax Inc., No. 17-15201, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 8743 (9th Cir. Mar. 25, 2019), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit addressed the Article III standing of bankrupt debtors complaining about how their bankruptcy was reported on their consumer report. In holding [in Spokeo, Ed.] that the plaintiff did have standing, we emphasized that  the inaccuracies in… Read More

In Singer v. Las Vegas Ath. Clubs, No. 2:17-cv-01115-GMN-VCF, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48838 (D. Nev. Mar. 25, 2019), Judge Singer found the Second Circuit’s Reyes decision incompatible with Ninth Circuit precedent. Preliminarily, the Court is bound by the Ninth Circuit's ruling in Van Patten. To the extent Reyes may serve as persuasive authority, the Court finds it cannot be… Read More

In Schaevitz v. Braman Hyundai, No. 1:17-cv-23890-KMM, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48906 (S.D. Fla. Mar. 25, 2019), Judge Moore found that direct-to-voicemail call technology placed a “call” under the TCPA.  The facts were as follows: Major Advertising, LLC, on behalf of Defendant, transmitted an unsolicited pre—recorded voicemail message (the "Message") to Plaintiff's cellular telephone, which stated as follows: Hi, this… Read More

In Kang v. Credit Bureau Connection, No. 1:18-CV-01359-AWI-SKO, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45352 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 19, 2019), Judge Ishii denied a data reseller’s motion to dismiss under the FCRA and CCRAA.  The facts alleged were as follows: Plaintiff went to a car dealership in Huntington Beach, California to buy a car. After he selected the car that he wanted… Read More

In Brown v. I.C. Sys., No. 16 C 9784, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45384 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 20, 2019), Judge Alonso denied a debt collector’s summary judgment motion, first finding that the call pattern created a question of fact. Defendant argues that its recordings of connected calls show that plaintiff never told defendant to stop calling; on the few occasions… Read More

In Obduskey v. McCarthy & Holthus, LLP, the SCOTUS issued its opinion finding that a law firm engaged in non-judicial foreclosure was not a “debt collector” under the FDCPA.  We post below from the SCOTUS’ syllabus. Law firm McCarthy & Holthus LLP was hired to carry out a nonjudicial foreclosure on a Colorado home owned by petitioner Dennis Obdus- key. McCarthy sent… Read More

The deadline for introducing new legislation in the California Legislature for the 2019 Legislative session was February 22, 2019. While new amendments to the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (the “CCPA”) could still be introduced via the “gut and amend” maneuver (which is how the CCPA itself was introduced in June 2018), we now have a general idea of… Read More

In Frank v. Gaos, the SCOTUS today placed further standing impediments to privacy and other purely statutory/no damages class actions, finding, following objections to the class action settlement, that the case should be remanded to determine standing under Spokeo.  The background facts were as follows: Three named plaintiffs brought class action claims against Google for alleged violations of the Stored Communications Act.… Read More