Soppet v. ENHANCED RECOVERY CO., LLC

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “an automated call to a cell phone adds expense to annoyance”
• defining “current subscriber” as “the person who pays the bills or needs the line in order to receive other calls”
• explaining with respect to the cellular telephone line provisions that “called party” means “the person subscribing to the called number at the time the call is made”
• noting split between the Seventh and Eleventh Circuits and the Second and Ninth Circuits
• “‘called party’ in § 227(b)(1) means the person subscribing to the called number at the time the call is made”
• “For cell service, the subscriber and the person who answers almost always are the same, given the norm that one person does not answer another’s cell phone.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).