United States v. One (1) 1981 65' Skokum Motor Sailor Ketch Named \Silurian\

How courts have described this case

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

• holding plaintiff had TCPA standing even though number was registered in someone else’s name because he was the cell phone’s “regular user and carrier”
• applying the rule of last antecedent to find “charged for the call” only applied to “any service”
• rejecting argument that only “called party” has standing after finding “no limitation in the text of the statute to indicate that only a ‘called party’ may assert a TCPA claim”
• “[T]he Leyse court cites § 227(b)(3) for the proposition that ‘[a] called party who receives such a call is permitted to bring suit to collect $500 in statutory damages.’ As explained above, the term ‘called party’ does not even appear in § 227(b)(3

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).