VonDeylen v. Aptive Environmental LLC, 0:24-cv-02051

Plaintiff Kristi VonDeylen’s phone number was on the national Do-Not-Call registry since 2006.
In May 2020, VonDeylen contracted with Aptive Environmental LLC for pest control services, signing an agreement with an arbitration clause.
The agreement permitted Aptive to contact VonDeylen for account and appointment purposes; a separate checklist offered optional consent for marketing texts, which VonDeylen did not check.
The service relationship ended in January 2021; however, VonDeylen received unsolicited automated texts from Aptive in 2023, over two years after service had ended.
VonDeylen filed a class action alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and invasion of privacy, and Aptive moved to compel arbitration per their contract.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does the arbitration clause cover post-contract TCPA claims?	Her claims arise from unsolicited text messages sent long after contract ended, unrelated to agreement/services.	Arbitration agreement is broad and survives termination; claims arise from parties' relationship due to past agreement.	No; claims do not "arise out of" or “relate to” the agreement or its performance, so arbitration clause does not apply.

Parm v. Bluestem Brands, Inc., 898 F.3d 869 (8th Cir. 2018) (scope of arbitration clauses; claims must relate to matters covered by the agreement)
Pro Tech Indus., Inc. v. URS Corp., 377 F.3d 868 (8th Cir. 2004) (courts must decide threshold questions of arbitrability)
Keymer v. Mgmt. Recruiters Int’l, Inc., 169 F.3d 501 (8th Cir. 1999) (scope of arbitration analyzed under ordinary contract principles)
Shearson/Am. Express, Inc. v. McMahon, 482 U.S. 220 (1987) (federal policy favoring arbitration and its limits)
Telecom Italia, SpA v. Wholesale Telecom Corp., 248 F.3d 1109 (11th Cir. 2001) (arbitration clause does not reach claims not directly related to contract performance)