Latner v. Mount Sinai Health System, Inc., 879 F.3d 52

Plaintiff Daniel Latner received a single automated text in Sept. 2014 from WPMG/Mt. Sinai: a flu‑shot reminder with a clinic phone number.
Latner had provided his cell number and signed new‑patient forms at WPMG in 2003, which included language permitting use of his information for treatment and to recommend health‑related benefits/services.
Mt. Sinai used a vendor (PromptALERT) to send mass flu‑shot reminders to patients who visited within the prior three years; Latner’s 2011 visit fell within that window.
Latner sued under the TCPA, 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii), alleging the autodialed text violated the statute because he had not given prior express consent.
The District Court granted judgment on the pleadings for defendants, concluding the message fell within the FCC’s Healthcare Exception (or treated as healthcare‑related).
The Second Circuit affirmed on different grounds: it held that, under the factual circumstances and the patient forms, Latner had given prior express consent covering the single health‑related reminder text.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the automated flu‑shot text violated the TCPA	Latner: no prior express consent for autodialed text	Mt. Sinai: patient provided contact and consent for treatment‑related communications; healthcare exception applies	Court: Latner’s prior express consent (based on forms and circumstances) covered the single health‑related text; affirm judgment for defendants
Applicability of FCC Healthcare Exception / consent scope	Latner: message not within consent scope; TCPA protections apply	Mt. Sinai: message is a health care communication by a covered entity and/or within consent scope	Court: Did not rely on 2015 Treatment Exemption (not retroactive); instead found consent scope (per FCC guidance) encompassed the message
Whether later FCC rules (2015 Treatment Exemption) should govern	Latner: later FCC clarification narrows consent and might preclude text	Mt. Sinai: exemption supports non‑liability	Court: 2015 FCC rule not applied retroactively to 2014 text; decision rests on pre‑existing consent analysis
Standard of review for judgment on pleadings	Latner: factual assertions must be construed in his favor	Mt. Sinai: legal question amenable to judgment on pleadings	Court: reviewed de novo and accepted pleadings, but found consent established as a matter of law

Hayden v. Paterson, 594 F.3d 150 (2d Cir. 2010) (de novo review and standards for judgment on the pleadings)
Beal v. Stern, 184 F.3d 117 (2d Cir. 1999) (appellate affirmation may be sustained on any record‑supported ground)