MetLife TCPA Class Action Lawsuit Too Complex For Summary Judgment

Several requests for summary motions in the MetLife Telephone Consumer Protection Act class action lawsuit have been denied by a Florida federal judge who says the TCPA lawsuit is too complex for a summary judgment.

The MetLife TCPA class action lawsuit centers on issues related to alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. This law was passed by Congress in 1991, spurred on from concerns from their constituents. The Act came in response to concerns that changing communications technologies made it easier and cheaper for corporations to send out mass advertisements. In particular, the advent of mass-faxes and autodialers (also called robodialers) meant that telemarketing firms could send out mass advertisements for a fraction of their usual costs. Later updates to the Act, as well as court decisions in TCPA lawsuits, have determined that the federal law does not impact companies’ First Amendment rights, and that the Act also applies to some newer technologies like text messaging.

The MetLife TCPA class action lawsuit alleges that Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, through various intermediaries, sent out advertising faxes that violated the TCPA.

Specifically, it is alleged in the TCPA class action lawsuit that MetLife employee S.S. contracted a company to send out a mass fax to generate leads for future life insurance sales. The MetLife lawsuit alleges that the unsolicited faxed advertisements went out to consumers with no prior business arrangement with MetLife, and that the ads contained no “opt out” instructions. The lawsuit also claims that these incidents constitute violations of the TCPA.

Within the MetLife TCPA class action lawsuit, both sides have filed for summary judgments on differing grounds. The presiding judge ruled that only parts of the matter could be ruled in summary.

For example, the judge ruled that the faxes in question did violate the TCPA and related laws, in that they were unsolicited advertisements sent by fax with no opt-out option. However, the judge ruled that MetLife’s liability in the case is too complex an issue for a summary judgment and recommended that the matter be considered in trial.

This particular aspect of the case hinges on the fact that MetLife allegedly worked through an intermediate company, and that the broker in question may have acted on his own recognizance without guidance from MetLife itself. The judge ruled that these issues made the case too complex for a summary judgment.

The TCPA is designed, in part, for enforcement via lawsuits. Under the TCPA and related laws, consumers can fill TCPA class action lawsuit against companies that have allegedly violated the TCPA as a deterrent to offenders.

Alleged TCPA violations lend themselves to class action lawsuits, since they typically involve a large group of consumers with identical complaints and evidence. Group lawsuits like TCPA class action lawsuits are designed to help streamline the legal system by combining tens, hundreds, or even thousands of potential individual suits into a single lawsuit.

The MetLife TCPA Class Action Lawsuit is C-Mart Incorporated v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, et al., Case No. 13-80561-CIV, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

Join a Free TCPA Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If you were contacted on your cell phone by a company via an unsolicited text message (text spam) or prerecorded voice message (robocall), you may be eligible for compensation under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Learn more and see if you qualify for a legal claim at the Text Message Spam, Unwanted Cell Phone Calls TCPA Class Action Lawsuit Settlement Investigation.