Legal Opinion
Bradley Van Patten v. Vertical Fitness Group
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided January 30, 2017No. 14-55980PublishedCited by 264 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GOULD, Circuit Judge:
This is a consumer protection case arising from text messages about a gym membership. The parties dispute the scope of the consumer’s consent to being contacted after he gave his cell phone number while signing up for a gym membership, and whether he revoked his consent when he cancelled the membership. For purposes of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA), we hold that the scope of a consumer’s consent depends on the transactional context in which it is given. The call or text message must be based on the circumstance in which the consumer gave his…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Spokeo, Inc. v. RobinsSupreme Court of the United States · 2016
- Neder v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Campbell-Ewald Co. v. GomezSupreme Court of the United States · 2016
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by264 opinions
- Samuel Zean v. Fairview Health ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2017
- Nicole Blow v. Bijora, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2017
- Thomas Robins v. Spokeo, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
- Krakauer v. Dish Network, L. L.C.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2019
- Ali Gadelhak v. AT&T Services, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2020
259 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.