A federal appeals court in California ruled Wednesday that Credit One Bank, N.A. can’t dodge liability under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for making automated calls to an 11-year-old’s cellphone without his consent even though the bank intended to call a customer who had previously given consent and whose number had been reassigned to the boy’s mother.
A panel for the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court’s judgment after a jury trial, saying it agreed with two other circuit courts, the 7th and 11th Circuits, that have ruled on the issue. The bank had challenged a federal district court’s jury instruction as “erroneous” that the robocall law requires the current subscriber’s consent rather than that of the intended recipient of the call, and on the definition of an automatic telephone dialing system.
To read the full story on Westlaw Practitioner Insights, click here: bit.ly/2zYE5W2