Legal Opinion
Nicholson v. Hooters of Augusta, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Decided March 10, 1998No. 96-9149PublishedCited by 53 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GIBSON, Senior Circuit Judge:
Sam Nicholson appeals the district court’s dismissal of his action against Hooters of Augusta, Inc. for failure to state a claim.. Nicholson alleged that Hooters violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.G. § 227 (1994), by sending unsolicited advertisements to Nicholson’s facsimile machine. Nicholson contends the court erred in concluding that the Telephone Consumer Protection Act covers only interstate, and not intrastate, transmissions of unsolicited advertisements by facsimile, and that individual citizens may not bring suit under the Act. Because…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- International Science & Technology Institute, Incorporated v. Inacom Communications, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1997
- Chair King, Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellants-Cross-Appellees v. Houston Cellular Corporation, Defendants-Appellees-Cross-Appellants, Karen Laake, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1997
- Kenro, Inc. v. Fax Daily, Inc.District Court, S.D. Indiana · 1997
- Kenro, Inc. v. Fax Daily, Inc.District Court, S.D. Indiana · 1995
- Foxhall Realty Law Offices, Inc. v. Telecommunications Premium Services, Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 1997
3Cited by53 opinions
- James Brill, Plaintiff-Respondent v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., Defendant-PetitionerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2005
- Charvat v. NMP, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2011
- Landsman & Funk PC v. Skinder-Strauss AssociatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2011
- Erienet, Inc. Sandra MacKenzie John Knauer Frank Mezler, Jr. v. Velocity Net, Inc. Thomas Dylewski Chad FerenackCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1998
- Carnett's, Inc. v. HammondSupreme Court of Georgia · 2005
48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.