Many companies freely violate the do not call law, also known as the TCPA. Many cases settle, but sometimes they contest the claim particularly in class actions. One defense is that the company is located in another state so there is no jurisdiction over them. If the number called is associated with the called state, most courts have rejected that.
The Lack of Jurisdiction Defense
This Court finds that calling Mey’s number in West Virginia 25 times, as alleged in the complaint, demonstrates that Phillips purposefully availed himself of the privilege of conducting business in the state of West Virginia. times for the singular purpose of soliciting business from her. In the context of the TCPA, other courts have held that personal jurisdiction is proper in the District where an unlawful communication is received. See, e.g., Payton v. Kale Realty, L.L.C., No. 13 C 8002, 2014 WL 4214917, at *3 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 26, 2014) (Courts have repeatedly held that sending a message into the forum state in violation of the TCPA is sufficient to confer specific personal jurisdiction over the defendant.”); Luna v. Shac, , No. C14-00607, *4 (N.D. Cal. July 14, 2014) (When the defendant intentionally sent unsolicited text messages advertising itself to California cell phone numbers, which conduct gave rise to this litigation, it purposefully directed its activity to California Mey v. Castle Law Grp., PC, 416 F. Supp. 3d 580, 586 (N.D.W. Va. 2019).
Are you having a robocall problem, getting repeated calls?
Call (973) 598-1980 for a Free Consultation
