Nothing more frustrating for a TCPA defendant than being sued on a claim the Plaintiff “revoked” consent but the plaintiff can’t provide details around that revocation.
Then again, such failure will inevitably lead to the case being thrown out– just much later in the suit than the defendant would prefer.
Take the case of Anderson v. Monterey Financial Services, LLC , 2026 WL 318773 (E.D. Tex. Jan 16, 2026).
There the plaintiff sued Monterey Financial Services claiming he had revoked consent but still received unwanted prerecorded collection calls. But he could not remember when exactly he asked for calls to stop.
In fact in deposition he testified he suffered “short term memory loss.” But despite the memory loss he still sued the defendant for revocations he could not remember.
Wild.
Luckily the court in Anderson credited the defendant’s business records and determined the only reliable evidence showed Monterey had actually honored the revocation effort and placed only 4 manual calls after the revocation (which is allowed in this context because the calls were not marketing.)
So summary judgment was granted in favor of the defense.
Still, however, defendant had to litigate the case all the way through MSJ to get this win– which has to be frustrating. Then again, because the case proceeded before a magistrate judge the result came much faster than would otherwise have been expected– so Monterey probably only spent about $300k defending this totally frivolous lawsuit. 🙂
Be sure to AVOID these suits to begin with and request a FREE copy of the Troutman Amin, LLP 2026 TCPA Annual Review, presented by Contact Center Compliance. 50 pages of TCPA goodness– all yours and all FREE!
Chat soon.