DE Under 3: Reversal of 2019 Enterprise Rent-a-Car Trial Decision; EEOC Commissioner Nominee Update; Overtime Listening Session
The Dangers of Untimely Filings – What Employers Need to Know
Podcast: Non-binding Guidance: A Discussion of Kisor v. Wilkie
Jones Day Talks: Women in IP: The Supreme Court's "Copyright Day"
E17: Carpenter Decision Builds Up Privacy from #SCOTUS
Delivered in digestible, insightful bites, McGlinchey’s Litigation Byte is a monthly roundup of financial services decisions and cases nationwide that impact your business....more
In the case of Drazen v. Pinto, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals sitting en banc ruled unanimously that plaintiffs who received a single unwanted telemarketing text message suffered a concrete injury. In 2019, Susan...more
In Weitz v. Genting New World LLC, No. 1:22-cv-23209-BLOOM, 2023 WL 2328365, at *1 (S.D. Fla. Mar. 2, 2023), Plaintiff Brandon Weitz brought suit against Defendant Genting New World LLC on behalf of himself and a putative...more
Recently, the Eleventh Circuit remanded a TCPA suit for the district court to rule on Article III standing, finding that the trial court should have addressed the standing issue because plaintiffs failed to plead the number...more
The Southern District of Florida recently remanded a case back to state court because the defendant that removed the case failed to establish that plaintiff suffered an Article III injury. Harris v. Travel Resorts of America,...more
Defense arguments about a plaintiff’s lack of standing in federal court can come back to bite them, as shown by the Southern District of Florida’s recent decision in Guerra v. Newport Beach Auto. Grp. LLC, No. 21-20568, 2021...more
The Eleventh Circuit last week issued a common-sense ruling vacating class certification in a TCPA case—an area of the law where common sense does not always prevail. In Cordoba v. DIRECTV, LLC, No. 19-12077 (11th Cir. Nov....more
As the Baron reported last month, we’ve seen a recent trend in which plaintiffs have been using their own lack of Article III standing as a means to avoid federal jurisdiction. Yet again, we have another culprit… this time, a...more
We’re closely tracking the recent trend involving plaintiffs’ use of their lack of Article III standing as a basis to avoid federal jurisdiction. Last week we reported on a case in the Northern District of California that was...more
A few weeks back Consumer Class Action “Titan” Jay Edelson joined us on the Ramble podcast and predicted that TCPA class actions arising in state court that are removed to federal court and later challenged on Article III...more
St. Louis Heart Center, Inc. v. Nomax, Inc., No. 19-1794, 2018 WL 3719694 (8th Cir. Aug. 6, 2018) - Plaintiff filed a class action lawsuit in state court, alleging Defendant sent it 12 fax advertisements without including...more
After granting summary judgment for lack of standing against a plaintiff who bought multiple cell phones and numbers for purposes of filing TCPA lawsuits, the Court was faced with a Motion to Amend Judgment wherein Plaintiff...more
On May 16, 2016, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Spokeo v. Robins, which posed the question of whether Article III standing requires a plaintiff to have a concrete injury when alleging a statutory violation under the...more