During these challenging times, Severson & Werson remains open and in full operation, consistent with the firm’s previously established contingency planning. While many of our attorneys and staff will be working remotely, as a firm, we continue in full operation. We are here to help, as always.


Subscribe to Consumer Finance

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Consumer Finance Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

In Walker v. Credit Protection Ass'n, LP, 2015 WL 5522000, at *3-4 (M.D.Fla.,2015), Judge Sneed refused a TCPA Plaintiff's efforts to obtain a site inspection of the Defendant's call center and telephone system. Specifically, the Notice of Site Inspection requested "[t]hat Defendant permit Plaintiff to enter Defendant's Call Center and to inspect and to photograph, examine Defendant's telephone system and… Read More

In Ossola v. American Express Company, 2015 WL 5158712 (N.D. Ill. 2015), Judge Cole found that a TCPA plaintiff, whose liability theory against a Defendant proceeded solely based on vicarious liability, was not entitled to "call data" from that Defendant because it was irrelevant since since that Defendant did not place any calls.  Instead, the discovery appeared to be improperly tailored… Read More

In Thrasher v. CMRE Financial Services, Inc., 2015 WL 1138469 (S.D.Cal. 2015), Magistrate Stormes ordered a TCPA class-action defendant to produce outbound call lists, information on use of an ATDS, and ESI related to the putative classmembers’ consent.   The Magistrate ordered production of the outbound call lists. The court finds that the outbound call list is reasonably calculated to identify the… Read More

In Charvat v. Travel Services, 2015 WL 3917046, at *4-5 (N.D.Ill., 2015), Judge Wood affirmed the Magistrate Judge's sua sponte imposition of relevancy objections to deny discovery toward a serial TCPA Plaintiff. RCL contends that Charvat's tax returns are relevant to show that he derives substantial income from TCPA litigation and that his motivation for filing this action is financial gain rather… Read More

In Gold Group Enterprises, Inc. v. Bull, 2015 WL 3794719  (D.N.J.,2015), Judge Hammer granted in part and denied in part a Motion to Quash a TCPA subpoena issued to a third party service provider.  Petitioner Gold Mobile was not a party to the litigation. According to Gold Mobile's Executive Vice President, Gold Mobile provided various technological platforms and services that allowed companies to… Read More

In Balschmiter v. TD Auto Finance LLC, 2015 WL 2451853E.D. Wis. 2015), Judge Stadtmueller denied Plaintiff’s request to use a classmember list provided under a protective order to give pre-trial notice to putative classmembers after the Court (and 7th Circuit) already had denied class certification. The Court will not expend its resources, limited as they are, elaborating on the defendant’s… Read More

In Taylor v. Universal Auto Grp. I, Inc.,  2015 WL 2406071, at *4-5 (S.D. Ohio 2015), Judge Black affirmed a Magistrate's order compelling disclosure, pre-certification, of TCPA class members' names and addresses. OneCommand's primary argument is that the requested information is not relevant because the underlying action is in the pre-certification stage and that Plaintiff could only use this information to… Read More

In Hartley–Culp v. Credit Management Co., 2014 WL 4630852 (M.D.Pa. 2014), Judge Blewitt rejected a TCPA defendant's request for a stay/bifurcation of discovery. Defendant CMC seeks the Court to bifurcate discovery into two phases with the first phase limited to the issue of whether Plaintiff expressly consented to receiving calls on her cell phone. Defendant CMC maintains that if it proves… Read More

In Olney v. Job.com, 2014 WL 4629062 (E.D.Cal. 2014), the Plaintiff filed a TCPA class action based on calls he received after signing up for Defendant's resume service.  The Plaintiff and Defendant entered into a Discovery Stipulation allowing the parties to designate certain information as "Confidential".  The Defendant produced, and marked confidential, three recordings of telephone conversations with the Plaintiff.  As a… Read More

In Molnar v. NCO Financial Systems, Inc., 2014 WL 3371414 (S.D.Cal. 2014), Magistrate Judge Burkhardt allowed subpoenas to go forward issued by a TCPA defendant to the class Plaintiff's creditors and telephone carriers. The parties' dispute concerns defendant's requests for eight categories of documents from plaintiffs' creditors.FN1 The documents sought are to support defendant NCO's defense that it called plaintiffs to collect… Read More

1 2 3 4