TCPAWORLD AFER DARK: Yet ANOTHER Huge TCPA Settlement to Discuss as Snap Finance Pays $5MM to Settle Robocall Claims

Man, what a day for Mike Greenwald.

As I reported earlier today, a TCPA class settlement involving Medicredit netted his firm $600k in fees.

Well, literally the same day the Medicredit settlement received approval, another TCPA wrong number class action brought by Greenwald’s firm (Greenwald Davidson Radbil PLLC) was also approved by the court–resulting in an aware of another $1.66MM in fees to GDR.

That’s over $2.25MM in fees awarded in one day!

Holy smokes. The Plaintiff’s bar makes so, so, so much more money than we do on the defense side.

The humble Czar makes a decent living, but nothing like the dangerously well-funded Plaintiff’s bar in this space. Its absolutely criminal in my view–but that won’t stop the “consumer-friendly” NCLC from supporting these guys.

But I digress.

The new settlement, involving Snap Finance, LLC was the result of a certification ruling that hammered the company last year.

As with Greenwald’s other recent wins, the TCPA class action against Snap was a wrong number TCPA class action–in other words Snap had to pay $5MM for robocalls is mistakenly made to the wrong party.


I will be on stage at LeadsCon with a critical member of the FCC and the head of the nation’s Reassigned Numbers Database, talking about PRECISELY these issues and how to avoid problems just like this. You NEED to be there.

Plus you can hear Greenwald, himself, discuss the impact of the RND here:

Anyway, in Wesley v. Snap Finance, LLC, 2023 WL 1812670 (D. Ut. Feb. 7, 2023) the Court approved the $5mm deal involving the following class of people:

All persons throughout the United States (1) to whom Snap Finance LLC placed, or caused to be placed, a call, (2) directed to a number assigned to a cellular telephone service, but not assigned to a current or former Snap Finance LLC accountholder, (3) in connection with which Snap Finance LLC used an artificial or prerecorded voice, (4) from September 1, 2019 through June 14, 2022

That “assigned to” language is really problematic because it creates a divide between class members who own their phones and those who have phones paid for by somebody else. So this case should NEVER have been certified. But I digress.

Its another big payday for Mr. Number One.

Speaking of which, my updated power rankings will be out again next month. I wonder if Greenwald will retain the title? Find out soon…


Leave a Reply