Search for: "U. S. v. Dial*#" Results 1 - 20 of 73
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 Jan 2015, 5:59 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Liveperson, Inc. v. 24/7 Customer, Inc., 2015 WL 170348, No. 14 Civ. 1559 (S.D.N.Y. [read post]
14 Jun 2021, 5:47 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Dial Car Inc. v Tuch & Cohen, LLP  2021 NY Slip Op 30407(U) February 10, 2021 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: 514138/20 Judge: Leon Ruchelsman gives a nice description of the current standard of JL § 487 in the Second Department. [read post]
10 Mar 2021, 3:45 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
  In Dial Car Inc. v Tuch & Cohen, LLP  2021 NY Slip Op 30407(U) February 10, 2021 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: 514138/20 Judge: Leon Ruchelsman the court dismissed. [read post]
25 Jul 2018, 3:29 pm
S. 735 (no expectation of privacy in records of dialed telephone numbers conveyed to telephone compa­ny). [read post]
8 Apr 2021, 7:45 am by Barbara S. Mishkin
After looking at how the decision narrows the technology covered by the Telephone Consumer Protection Act’s automatic telephone dialing system definition, we discuss its implications for TCPA litigation going forward, including do-not-call and prerecorded call claims and the intersection with debt collection claims, and for regulatory compliance when making calls for telemarketing or lead generation, as well as possible Congressional responses to the decision. [read post]
24 Mar 2022, 10:22 am by Barbara S. Mishkin
Although the decision narrowed the technology covered by the TCPA’s automatic telephone dialing system definition, the TCPA continues to be very dangerous. [read post]
2 May 2022, 4:12 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
Dial Car Inc. v Kordonsky  2022 NY Slip Op 31067(U) March 31, 2022 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: Index No. 521900/2021 Judge: Leon Ruchelsman is a case which has been brought previously and is now in its second amended complaint. [read post]
25 Sep 2017, 5:35 am by Jessica Smith
He asserts that the Court’s decades old third-party doctrine cases–Smith v. [read post]