ULTIMATE GAG ORDER?: Repeat TCPA Litigator Banned From Contacting SelectQuote and I Have Never Seen Anything Like It

3 Comments

Not really sure what to make of this incredible order out Friday, but I figured I would share.

In Human v. SelectQuote, 2024 WL 149232 (E.D. Mo. Jan. 12, 2024) the two sides in a TCPA lawsuit are simply not getting along.

Indeed, apparently the parties have filed a dozen motions before the Court even held its first pre-trial conference.

Among these motions Daniel Human moved to strike SelectQuote’s motion to dismiss arguig that SQ’s counsel was not actually authorized to practice law in Missouri. The Court swiftly denied that motion–she was admitted pro hac vice–but it just shows the level of acrimony here.

To calm things down a bit the Court entered an order staying discovery, and threw shade at both parties in doing so:

There is good cause to stay discovery. The parties have shown that they cannot resolve basic issues without the Court’s intervention. The Court has not yet held a pretrial conference, and the parties have already filed more than a dozen motions. Allowing these parties to engage in discovery before the Court rules on the pending motion to dismiss seems very likely to require unnecessary expense of time and effort on the part of the Court and the parties.

Eesh.

But in the end the Court was clearly most irritated at the Plaintiff and banned Human from communicating with the opposing side:

Plaintiff, Plaintiff’s counsel, and anyone acting on behalf of Plaintiff or his counsel will not contact Defendants or their employees without the Court’s leave. The Court may assess sanctions for violations of this Order.

Holy smokes.

I have been practicing for over 20 years now and I have never seen a party banned from communicating with an opposing side without leave of court. This is simply incredible.

Pretty clear that the Court wants this case on ice until it can rule on the motion to dismiss–which I am guessing will not go favorably for the Plaintiff.

Also if you missed it last week–the 2024 Troutman Amin, LLP TCPA Annual Review, presented by Contact Center Compliance is NOW AVAILABLE–and yours free. All you have to do is ask for it.

SEVENTH DAY OF CZARMAS!: IT’S HERE IT’S HERE IT’S FINALLY HERE!!!!–2024 Troutman Amin, LLP TCPA Review, presented by Contact Center Compliance is AVAILABLE NOW (FREE!)

Chat soon!

Discover more from TCPAWorld

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Categories:

Published by Eric "Czar" 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.

3 Comments

  1. I fail to understand why you feel it is going badly for the Plaintiff. So far, in this case, Plaintiff has managed to obtain a $149,500.00 judgment against one of the co-defendants.

    Reply

  2. Mark: So typically Mr. Troutman only checks results/final orders/opinions, so he wouldn’t have seen the judgement you brought to light (thanks!) It’s up to us guys to do the deep dives for the full story…

    Reply

  3. My curiosity now piqued, I checked out this Plaintiff and seems he & his atty seem to be pretty creative in their math…
    Re: Human v. SelectQuote, Inc. (4:23-cv-00826-SEP)
    “Count 1: Telephone Consumer Protection Act (Violations of 47 U.S.C. § 227)(On behalf of Plaintiff and the National Do Not Call Registry) …violations of the TCPA, 47 U.S.C. § 227, Plaintiff and
    members of the Class presumptively are entitled to an award of $1,500 in damages for every call made, and treble damages of $25,000.00 per call and text.”
    So $1500/call trebled = $25K?!?!?!
    But wait, there’s more!!
    Count 2: “…and through the aid and assistance of the robo-call and ATDS dialing systems violations of the TCPA, 47 U.S.C. § 227, Plaintiff and members of the Class presumptively are entitled to an award of $1,500 in damages for every call made, and treble damages of $15,000.00 per call.”
    This time, $1500/call gets trebled to (only) $15K/call…
    What am I missing?
    Note: while they also claim monetary damages under Missouri law(s) those are listed separately

    Reply

Leave a Reply