News & Analysis as of

Standing › Injury-in-Fact › Cell Phones

Troutman Pepper

Speak for Yourself: Court Denies Class Certification in TCPA Case Based on Class Members’ Potentially Mixed Reactions to Ringless...

Troutman Pepper on

On January 18, a court in the Eastern District of Wisconsin denied class certification in a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) case concluding that the factual issue of whether the proposed class members had suffered an...more

Burr & Forman

Illinois District Court Denies Motion to Certify TCPA Class Action

Burr & Forman on

In the consolidated cases Espejo v. Santander Consumer USA Inc., No. 11 C 8987, 2016 WL 6037625 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 14, 2016) and Levins v. Santander Consumer USA Inc., No. 12 C 9431, 2016 WL 6037 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 14, 2016), the...more

Burr & Forman

Southern District of California Holds Charge for Incoming Call Does Not Create Standing to Assert TCPA Claim

Burr & Forman on

Plaintiff filed suit, placing at issue a single call to his cell phone using an ATDS, and attempting to represent a class of similarly situated individuals. The only allegation in the Complaint arguably relating to injury was...more

Burr & Forman

District Court Holds Professional Plaintiff Lacks Article III Standing to Bring TCPA Action Under Supreme Court’s Spokeo, Inc. v....

Burr & Forman on

Following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (U.S. May 16, 2016), it is clear that “Article III standing requires a concrete injury even in the context of a statutory violation,” such that a...more

4 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide