Court Denies Summary Judgment to Law Firm Collecting Debt Using LiveVox

In the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals footprint (including Indiana), a system must randomly or sequentially generate numbers and dial them in order to qualify as an automatic telephone dialing system (ATDS) under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). But you’d never know it reading the decision in Friend v. Taylor Law (N.D. Ind. Dec. 18, 2020).

In Friend, a court denied summary judgment to a law firm that was collecting a debt owed to its client. The law firm’s representative testified that it used the LiveVox system but wasn’t sure how it worked. He testified that he “believed” the system lacked the capacity to dial automatically as a predictive dialer. The Court found that the Defendant’s belief regarding the system’s ability to dial automatically was insufficient to merit summary judgment and instead decided to send the issue to the jury.

So what’s wrong with that?

View this content by subscribing

Please register to unlock this content

I already have an account. Log in