Matter of Crossett

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding plaintiff had standing under TCPA to challenge receipt of allegedly unwanted faxes before concluding that consent defeated claim on merits
• discussing an equivalent express consent exception in the context of faxed advertisements
• explaining plaintiff consented to contact by affiliates by signing a contract that stated, “We may offer optional assistance to you with purchasing items used at or in the Facility. Our affiliates may offer this service on our behalf.”
• fax solicited when recipient entered into written agreement that permitted company and its affiliates to “offer [] service[s]” and recipient had received, without objection, similar faxes from other affiliates in past
• “The injuries caused by unwanted fax advertisements . . . occur the moment the unwanted fax is received, regardless of whether the sender can establish a defense to liability under the TCPA.”
• “‘[P]rior’ permission requires that permission be given before the fax is sent.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).