TCPA Case Law – Nelson vs. Santander 11-cv-307-bbc

TCPA- Nelson vs. Santander


Some of the lawsuits we file are for significant money and some are not. In a normal case the most statutory damages you are going to get will likely come from a TCPA case.TCPA- Nelson vs. Santander

There is a growing wave of significant case law for TCPA. The best case I have yet to run across for study is Nelson vs. Santander in Wisconsin. This case has many objections raised by the debt collector’s attorneys. If you are going to study the TCPA, this is a great case to start your studies.

The collector, Santander, called Mrs. Heather Nelson over 1000 times on her cell phone. She was awarded $571,000 in damages. See the judge’s Opinion and Order here.

This case is key to study because it is case law for the definition of “expressed consent” that collectors often believe you have given them. This case will ruin most of the collectors’ arguments.

This case also clears up the issue of the method used to dial the phone when you were called. This case states that call places from a “preview mode” on a computer screen are subject to the TCPA. This makes most, if not all, calls that are dialed by a computer subject to the TCPA. In case you don’t know, the collectors would not be able to stay in business if they hand dialed every call the old fashioned way…

This is also a great case to study the Motion in Limines that were filed. As you may or may not yet know, a Motion in Limine is filed made at the start of a trial requesting that the judge rule that certain evidence may not be introduced in trial. There are many that were used in this trial. If you read this docket, you will find many motions that may be relevant to your case.

Let me know if you have any questions or comments,

Fight the Essential Fight, Boiler





Add Comment

Required fields are marked *. Your email address will not be published.