Legg v. Voice Media Group, Inc.
2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 483
| S.D. Fla. | 2014Background
- VMG operates text alert services sending mass texts nationwide.
- Legg allegedly subscribed to VMG’s services in 2012–2013.
- In July 2013 Legg attempted to unsubscribe by sending STOP/STOP ALL; VMG instructed to use STOP ALL or other options.
- Legg sent STOP ALL but VMG continued texts through September 2013, when suit was filed.
- Legg asserts TCPA violations; VMG moves to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6).
- Court applies Rule 12(b)(6) standard and liberal pleading rules.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Legg pled use of an ATDS | Legg pled auto-dialer use via short code and mass messaging | Legg’s factual support is conclusory | Denied; sufficient facts pled ATDS usage |
| Whether Legg revoked consent and still received texts | Legg revoked consent by replying STOP ALL | Revocation not adequately supported; consent issue forecloses claim | Denied; revocation pled sufficiently; post-revocation texts plausibly actionable |
Key Cases Cited
- Satterfield v. Simon & Schuster, Inc., 569 F.3d 946 (9th Cir. 2009) (ATDS definition and TCPA applicability to texts)
- Gager v. Dell Fin. Servs., LLC, 727 F.3d 265 (3d Cir. 2013) (Remedial nature; revocation of consent possible)
- Carmichael v. Nissan Motor Acceptance Corp., 291 F.3d 1278 (11th Cir. 2002) (Remedial consumer-protection interpretation)
- Twombly v. Bell Atl. Corp., 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (Plaintiff must plead plausible claim, not mere speculation)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (Plausibility standard for pleading)