SLIPERRY SNAKE: Python Leads, LLC and Jacquelyn and David Levin Slip Away From Final Expense Direct Indemnity Suit On Jurisdictional Grounds

1 Comment

As everyone knows, the Czar is a big fan of holding lead sellers to account when they get a lead buyer in trouble under the TCPA.

Indeed, folks sometimes marvel at how hard I push the lead generation industry to improve– forgetting, at times, that most of the Czar’s clients are lead buyers. So obviously I want (need) a good  clean lead ecosystem.

And when a lead buyer does sell a bad lead, I love seeing the lead seller push the indemnity provision and seek to hold the seller liable. Indeed, it is CRITICAL that there be consequences for bad lead sales, otherwise there is no incentive for a lead seller to behave themselves. (And THIS is also why the R.E.A.C.H. standards impose penalties on lead sellers that violate the rules!)

So a while back Final Expense Direct was allegedly caught up in a TCPA suit due to a lead sold by Python Leads, LLC. Jacquelyn Leah Levin is allegedly the founder and sole member of Python, and Defendant David Levin is an alleged employee of Python.

Apparently the Python leads lead to three TCPA lawsuits costing FED over $100,000 to settle the claims against it. FED demanded indemnity but, apparently, Python refused to pay up. So FED sued for breach of contract, breach of implied-in fact contract, promissory estoppel, quantum meruit, and violation of the Deceptive Trade Practices Act (“DTPA”).

But Python–that slippery snake–got away.

In FED v. Python, 2023 WL 5599000 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 29, 2023) the Court dismissed Defendants finding no persona jurisdiction over them in Texas. So FED is going to have to sue them again somewhere else, or give up.

Let’s hope they don’t give up.

Will keep an eye on this.

Categories:

Published by Eric J. Troutman

The Czar of TCPAWorld Eric Troutman is one of the country’s prominent class action defense lawyers and is nationally recognized in Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) litigation and compliance. He has served as lead defense counsel in more than 70 national TCPA class actions and has litigated nearly a thousand individual TCPA cases in his role as national strategic litigation counsel for major banks and finance companies. He also helps industry participants build TCPA-compliant processes, policies, and systems. Eric has built a national litigation practice based upon deep experience, rigorous analysis and extraordinary responsiveness. Eric and his team feel equally at home litigating multibillion dollar telecommunications class actions in federal court as they do developing and executing national litigation strategies for institutions facing an onslaught of individual TCPA matters. They thrive in each of these roles – delivering consistently excellent results – while never losing sight of the client experience. While many firms now tout TCPA expertise, Eric has been there from the beginning. He built one of the country’s first TCPA-only defense teams and began serving as national TCPA counsel for his clients nearly a decade ago. This perspective allows him to swiftly develop the right litigation strategies for dealing with recurring problems, without wasting time on tactics that are bound to fail. Eric’s rich historical perspective and encyclopedic knowledge of the TCPA landscape also make him an invaluable resource to institutional compliance teams struggling to comply with the shifting regulatory landscape. No task is too small – or too big. Indeed, Eric and his team have helped build TCPA-compliant systems and processes for some of the largest and most complex corporate entities in the country. He commonly works with in-house compliance counsel to build and implement enterprise and business-line specific TCPA solutions, performs TCPA audits and drafts and reviews proposed TCPA policies and procedures. He and his team also have the technical expertise necessary to assist call centers seeking to develop TCPA-resistant call path architecture or to modify existing telephony and software integration to better insulate from potential TCPA exposure. Eric has built a reputation for thought leadership. An avid blogger and speaker, he has been at the forefront of the industry’s effort to push for clarity and a return to sanity for the TCPA for years. He was selected to advocate for the financial services industry on important TCPA issues before the Federal Communications Commission and co-authored the nation’s only comprehensive practice guide on TCPA defense. In his spare time, Eric leads defense teams representing banks and other financial services companies in consumer finance litigation matters. He has experience representing clients in UCC, TILA, RESPA FCRA, CCRA, CLRA, FDCPA, RFDCPA and FCCPA claims, as well as in fraud and bank operations issues.

1 Comment

  1. Having just read the complaint in this matter, I have to wonder about Final Expense and where their brain was. They kept receiving complaints from irate consumers about illegal telemarketing calls, yet they continued to do business with Python Leads. Even after Final Expense got sued for TCPA violations, they continued to do business with Python Leads. Sadly, I see this same story played out over and over and over again. Lesson to be learned: If you are a seller and a consumer complains about your lead generator, dump the lead generator immediately.

    Reply

Leave a Reply