SCOREBOARD: Here is the Latest Status of the Texts vs. Calls Argument Under the TCPA

So as we reported earlier things are really getting spicy in the battle over whether SMS messages are covered by the TCPA.

Here is the current scoreboard.

There are seven cases holding SMS messages are NOT calls:

  1. Jones v. Blackstone Med. Servs., LLC, 792 F. Supp. 3d 894 (C.D. Ill. July 21, 2025)
  2. Davis v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., 797 F. Supp. 3d 1270 (N.D. Fla. Aug. 26, 2025)
  3. Sayed v. Naturopathica Holistic Health, 2025 WL 2997759 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 24, 2025)
  4. Radvansky v. Kendo Holdings, Inc., 3:23-cv-00214-LLM, slip op. (N.D. Ga. Feb. 12, 2026)
  5. Radvansky v. 1-800-Flowers.com, 2026 WL 456919 (N.D. Ga. Feb. 17, 2026)
  6. Lopresti v. Nouveau Essentials Marketing LLC, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39599 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 26, 2026)
  7. Stockdale v. Skymount Prop. Grp., LLC, et al., No. 1:25 CV 1282, 2026 WL 591842 (N.D. Ohio March 3, 2026)

And there are 15 cases holding text messages ARE calls for TCPA DNC purposes:

  1. Wilson v. Skopos Fin., LLC, No. 6:25-CV-00376-MC, 2025 WL 2029274 (D. Or. July 21, 2025)
  2. Watkins v. EyeBuyDirect, Inc., 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 167479 (W.D. Tex. Aug. 28, 2025)
  3. Bosley v. A Bradley Hosp. LLC, 2025 WL 2686984 (S.D. Fla. Sept. 19, 2025)
  4. Wilson v. MEDVIDI Inc., 2025 WL 2856295 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 7, 2025)
  5. Mujahid v. Newity, LLC, 2025 WL 3140725 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 10, 2025)
  6. Piet v. Office Depot, LLC, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 230981 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 24, 2025)
  7. Glasel v. Office Depot, LLC, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 231053 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 25, 2025)
  8. McGonigle v. Office Depot, LLC, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 231061 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 25, 2025)
  9. Esquivel v. Mona Lee, Inc., 2025 WL 3275607 (S.D. Cal. Nov. 24, 2025)
  10. Dilanyan v. Hugo Boss Fashions, Inc., No. 2:25-CV-05093-JLS-BFM, 2025 WL 3549868 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 3, 2025)
  11. Wilson v. Better Mortg. Corp., 2025 WL 3493815 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 5, 2025)
  12. Duron v. Kings Capital Holding LLC, 2026 LX 68851 (W.D. Tex. Jan. 13, 2026)
  13. Alvarez v. Fiesta Nissan, Inc., 2026 WL 202930 (S.D. Tex. Jan. 26, 2026)
  14. Hernandez v. Bedford Dental L.L.C., 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23208 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 4, 2026)
  15. McGonigle v. Shopperschoice.Com, LLC, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30157 (M.D. La. Feb. 13, 2026)

So 7-15 doesn’t sound very good but when we look closer we see things are actually tighter than they appear.

This is true because when we isolate the districts at issue we see it becomes a closer call.

Specifically there are six districts with favorable (i.e. SMS are not call) decisions:

  • C.D. Ill.
  • N.D. Fla.
  • M.D. Fla.
  • N.D. Ga.
  • M.D. Fla.
  • N.D. Ohio

And there are eleven districts with unfavorable (i.e. SMS are calls) decisions:

  • D. Or.
  • W.D. Tex.
  • S.D. Fla.
  • N.D. Cal.
  • N.D. Ill.
  • S.D. Cal.
  • C.D. Cal.
  • S.D.N.Y.
  • S.D. Tex.
  • N.D. Ill.
  • M.D. La.

And things get even more interesting when we look at matters geographically.

Basically California, New York and Texas support applying the TCPA to SMS messages.

Florida and Illinois are split.

Ohio says SMS messages are not subject to the TCPA.

Interesting, no?

Brilliant Blake is working on a map for all of this– will be out soon.

Will continue to track these developments.

Also if you want the most COMPREHENSIVE TCPA guide out there be sure to request a FREE copy of the 2026 Troutman Amin, LLP TCPA Annual Review, presented by Contact Center Compliance.

FIRST DAY OF CZARMAS 2026: THE 2026 TROUTMAN AMIN, LLP TCPA ANNUAL REVIEW, Presented By Contact Center Compliance is now FREE for the Asking!!!!!!!!!!!

Chat soon!


Discover more from TCPAWorld

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Categories:

Leave a Reply