An Arizona district court held that the defendants’ employee could be held directly liable under the TCPA because the plaintiff alleged that it was the employee himself who sent the text messages at issue. 05/17/2022 2:15 P.M. 3.5 minute read Whittaker v. Real Est. Heaven Int’l Inc., et al., No. CV-21-08212-PCT-DJH, 2022 WL 1540168 (D. […]
Arizona financial service licensees, after the passage of Senate Bill 1394, will be required to have a separate license per business name in the state. 03/25/2022 1:45 P.M. 1.5 minute read Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey has signed licensing legislation proposed by the Arizona’s Department of Insurance and Financial Institutions (DIFI). S.B. 1394 amends Arizona Revised […]
The plaintiff’s allegations that the defendant used a long code number to send a personalized message weighed against the conclusion that the text was sent using an ATDS. 03/16/2022 3:45 P.M. 2.5 minute read Jovanovic v. SRP Invs. LLC, No. CV-21-00393-PHX-JJT, 2021 WL 4198163 (D. Ariz. Sept. 15, 2021) By Andrew Pavlik – Compliance Analyst […]
The consumer was sued on a deficiency balance for a repossessed vehicle. The debt was reduced to judgment. The consumer sued the debt collector for violating the FDCPA, but the debt collector claimed the consumer did not have standing. 01/25/2022 3:30 P.M. 4 minute read Uvaldo v. Germaine L. Off. PLC, No. CV-20-00680-PHX-JJT, 2022 WL […]
An Arizona district court found that the collection of unpaid homeowner’s association assessments provided a permissible purpose under the FCRA for a law firm to access a consumer’s credit report. 01/24/2022 3:45 P.M. 4 minute read Wolf v. Carpenter Hazlewood Delgado & Bolen LLP, No. CV-20-00957-PHX-DLR, 2022 WL 168572 (D. Ariz. Jan. 19, 2022) By […]
The consumers received calls from car dealerships after they requested the calls cease. The consumers sued the company that owned the dealerships claiming it was vicariously liable for the alleged Telephone Consumer Protection Act violations committed by the dealerships. The court found the consumers did not have standing to proceed with their claim, but allowed them to conduct discovery to gather evidence to the contrary. […]
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use our site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Review our Privacy Policy for more information. You may change your preferences on how cookies are stored by reviewing the settings on your browser.
The content on this site is presented for educational, general reference, and informational purposes only; is not intended to serve as legal or other advice; is not intended to be a full and exhaustive explanation of the law in any area; and should not replace the advice of your own legal counsel. By continuing to use our site, you are agreeing to the legal disclaimers in our Terms of Use. Review our Terms of Use for more information.
Get continued access to ACA International’s wide array of resources, which can help you become more profitable, compliant and successful.
Renew your membership today to take advantage of tools you won’t find anywhere else: