Here. An interesting report on a third circuit case on whether consumers can revoke their consent to receive automated calls. The case arose in the debt collection context and given the steep penalties under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act–$500 per call and $1500 for willful violations–could lead to a lot of litigation.
Author Archives: Jeff Sovern
Remember how car dealers fought to avoid being subject to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's jurisdiction, and won? It turns out that the dealers are still experiencing pressure to comply with the Bureau's edicts. From Carter Dougherty's story: Under pressure from the agency, large banks that routinely buy auto loans have been reviewing records to […]
Charles L. Knapp of Hastings has written Is There a 'Duty to Read'? in Revisiting the Contracts Scholarship of Stewart Macaulay: On the Empirical and the Lyrical 315 (Jean Braucher, John Kidwell, & William C. Whitford eds. 2013). Here's the abstract: The notion that there is in general contract law a “duty to read” persists in […]
Daniel B. Heidtke, Jessica Stewart and Spencer Weber Waller, all of Loyola of Chicago's School of Law and its Institute for Consumer Antitrust Studies have written The Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991: Adapting Consumer Protection to Changing Technology. Here is the abstract: In the late 1980’s, spurred on by advances in technology, the telemarketing industry […]
Yesterday I blogged about a Times report on medical debt. Today the Times published an editorial, Alarming Abuses of Medical Credit Cards, as well as some letters on the matter.
by Jeff Sovern The Times published an article on medical debt earlier this week, Patients Mired in Costly Credit From Doctors. The gist of the article was that doctors establish relationships with lenders which then give credit to patients so that patients can obtain medical treatment. That sounds innocent, and even helpful, to patients who […]
Neil M. Richards of Wash U. has written Why Data Privacy Law Is (Mostly) Constitutional, forthcoming in his book, Intellectual Privacy, Oxford University Press (2014). Here's the abstract: This essay argues that privacy critics arguing that most privacy rules create constitutional problems overstate their case. Since the New Deal, American law has rested on the […]
Joshua Fairfield of Washington and Lee University has written Do-Not-Track as Default, 11 Northwestern Journal of Technology and intellectual Property (2013). Here's the abstract: Do-Not-Track is a developing online legal and technological standard that permits consumers to express their desire not to be tracked by online advertisers. Do-Not-Track has the ability to change the relationship between […]
Linda Mullenix of Texas has written The Court's 2012 Class Act: A Little Bit of This, a Little Bit of That, 40 Preview of U. S. Supreme Court Cases 328 (2013). Here's the abstract: Building on the Court’s heightened interest in class action litigation, the Court during the 2012-13 term issued an unprecedented six decisions […]
Catherine M. Sharkey of NYU has written The Future of Classwide Punitive Damages, 46 University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (2013). Here is the abstract: Conventional wisdom holds that the punitive damages class action is susceptible not only to doctrinal restraints imposed on class actions but also to constitutional due process limitations placed […]