In Nigro v. Mercantile Adjustment Bureau, plaintiff alleged that defendant violated the TCPA by calling his cell phone with a  dialer and without consent.  The district court entered summary judgment in defendant’s favor, concluding that plaintiff’s providing of the number to the creditor was effective consent.  Plaintiff appealed, arguing that the telephone number was only provided to the creditor when he called to terminate his deceased mother-in-law’s electrical service, as the creditor refused to accept the discontinue notice without a telephone number.  The appellate court reversed, concluding that plaintiff was not the consumer and that the cell number was not provided in connection with the debt, because it was provided only to end the service and plaintiff would not have reasonably anticipated any follow up calls, so that the FCC’s orders on consent did not apply.


In Margaritis v. BAC Home Loan Services, the district court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s FCRA claim arising out of a foreclosure proceeding, and plaintiff appealed.  The appellate court affirmed the dismissal, concluding first that the FCRA did not provide plaintiff with a private cause of action to challenge a foreclosure proceeding, and second, that plaintiff had failed to allege that she had disputed the credit reporting with a reporting agency, so as to trigger defendant’s duties of investigation under the FCRA.

Back to News & Resources