Weingrad v. Quotewizard.com, LLC
1:25-cv-00002
M.D. Penn.Jul 1, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Leon Weingrad alleges receiving unsolicited robocalls and texts from QuoteWizard.com, despite being on the National Do Not Call Registry, in violation of the TCPA.
- Plaintiff claims the calls were not initiated by him and were intended for a "Gary," based on calls and texts received.
- Defendant QuoteWizard.com moved to compel arbitration, arguing Plaintiff agreed to arbitrate by requesting a quote through its website under a different name and IP address (Islamabad, Pakistan).
- Defendant submitted evidence of a website insurance quote request from a different name but Plaintiff's number, saying acceptance of the site’s terms included mandatory arbitration.
- Plaintiff submitted an affidavit stating he did not visit the website, request any quote, or know anyone involved in those submissions, and never agreed to arbitrate.
- The dispute centers on whether there is a valid arbitration agreement covering these claims; the court confronted competing affidavits and a lack of definitive evidence tying Plaintiff to the alleged contract.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Existence of Arbitration Agreement | Weingrad never agreed; no factual connection to the website request | Plaintiff requested a quote/accepted terms; evidence links him to the request | Not clear; issue of fact |
| Sufficiency of Consent under TCPA/E-SIGN Act | Consent deficient; website terms lack necessary disclosures/identification | Website terms provided sufficient notice; requirements met under law | Not reached; discovery needed |
| Whether arbitrability is for court or arbitrator | Should be decided by court as agreement's existence is disputed | Arbitrability should be decided by arbitrator due to delegation clause | For court at this stage |
| Plaintiff as 'professional plaintiff' | Argument is improper at this stage/after answer already filed | Weingrad manufactured harm based on history of similar suits | Argument not reached |
Key Cases Cited
- Century Indem. Co. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, 584 F.3d 513 (3d Cir. 2009) (addresses federal law duty to honor arbitration agreements)
- Flintkote Co. v. Aviva PLC, 769 F.3d 215 (3d Cir. 2014) (two-part test for compelling arbitration)
- Par-Knit Mills, Inc. v. Stockbridge Fabrics Co., Ltd., 636 F.2d 51 (3d Cir. 1980) (genuine issue of fact as to agreement to arbitrate requires further proceedings)
- Kirleis v. Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C., 560 F.3d 156 (3d Cir. 2009) (disputed facts over formation of arbitration agreement preclude compelled arbitration)