TCPAWorld After Dark: Plaintiff Seeks En Banc Re-Hearing in Eleventh Circuit on Incentive Awards–Cites

Well it worked for Facebook, so why not give it a shot?

Just as Facebook cited to in an (ultimately successful) brief to the U.S. Supreme Court seeking review of the TCPA’s ATDS definition, the Plaintiff in the huge Johnson case–the Eleventh Circuit’s massive decision undermining incentive awards in class action litigation— has likewise chosen to cite to a article in support of its position.

At what point is officially recognized as the most influential legal blog on the planet?

Probably a little ways off.

For now, however, here’s the big brief filed by Charles Johnson seeking en banc review of the Eleventh Circuit’s ruling determining that incentive awards are no more: Johnson Petition for Rehearing

You’ll catch the reference on page 7.

More broadly the petition argues that incentive awards are critical to encouraging class litigation (not sure how this helps their argument) and that the Johnson decision is contrary to the law in every other circuit (that’s more convincing.) It also argues, rather directly, that the Johnson ruling is “wrong.”

No, literally, that’s a section header: “The Panel Decision Is Wrong.”

A little on the nose guys.

In any event, we’ll keep an eye on this huge en banc review. I’ve got to tell you, I think there’s a good chance of a re-hearing here.

That doesn’t mean the Eleventh is going to reverse, but this issue is certainly worthy of the whole gang getting together for a brief chat.

And if it happens, you’ll know why. 😉




Leave a Reply