“The Telephone Consumer Protection Act had humble beginnings,” our guest writes, “with the bill’s sponsor explaining that the statute would permit consumers to bring small claims cases ‘without an attorney,’ and provides for an ‘amount of damages … fair to both the consumer and the telemarketer.’ Twenty-eight years after its enactment in 1991, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a District Court’s decision to reduce a $1.6 billion jury award in a TCPA class action to only $32 million because the former was ‘shockingly large’ and ‘oppressive,’ in violation of the Due Process Clause …..”
Only $32 million! I mean, why bother even getting out of bed?
Joining me to discuss the evolution of the TCPA is Joseph A. Apatov (japatov@mcglinchey.com),
a member of the McGlinchey Stafford law firm’s Consumer Financial
Services Litigation practice group. Based in their Fort Lauderdale
office, Joe litigates on behalf of financial services clients in both
state and federal courts, with an emphasis on defending banks, mortgage
lenders and servicers, private-label card issuers, and automobile
finance companies.
Apologies for my trip down memory lane. Bear with me as I regale you with stories from the newsroom at Mealey’s Litigation Reports and the team’s anxious reliance on the “latest” technology: the facsimile machine.
This podcast is the audio companion to the Journal on Emerging Issues in Litigation, a collaborative project between HB Litigation Conferences and the Fastcase legal research family, which includes Full Court Press, Law Street Media,
and Docket Alarm. The podcast itself is a joint effort between HB and
Law Street Media. If you have comments or wish to participate in one our
projects, or want to tell me how much Joe enlightened you, please drop
me a note at Editor@LitigationConferences.com.
