Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Kristensen v. Credit Payment Services Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

January 10, 2018

Flemming Kristensen, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Credit Payment Services Inc., FKA mycashnow.com Inc.; Enova International, Inc.; Pioneer Financial Services, Inc.; Leadpile, LLC; Click Media, LLC, DBA ClickMedia 1240 Johnson Ferry Place, Ste. B75 Marietta, GA 30068, DBA Net1Promotions LLC, DBA Net 1 Promotions, LLC, Defendants-Appellees.

          Argued and Submitted October 20, 2017 San Francisco, California

         Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada, D.C. No. 2:12-cv-00528-APG-PAL Andrew P. Gordon, District Judge, Presiding

          Alexander G. Tievsky (argued), Roger Perlstadt, and Ryan D. Andrews, Edelson PC, Chicago, Illinois, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

          James M. Lord (argued) and Asher M.B. Ritmiller, Inman Flynn Biesterfeld & Brentlinger P.C., Denver, Colorado, for Defendants-Appellees Credit Payment Services Inc. and Leadpile LLC.

          Brian P. O'Meara (argued), Kevin R. Malloy, Joanne R. Driscoll, and Kevin M. Forde, Forde Law Offices LLP, Chicago, Illinois; Dan R. Waite, Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP, Las Vegas, Nevada; for Defendant-Appellee Enova International Inc.

          Kelly H. Dove and Chad R. Fears, Snell & Wilmer LLP, Las Vegas, Nevada; Robert V. Spake Jr. and Russell S. Jones Jr., Polsinelli PC, Kansas City, Missouri; for Defendant-Appellee Pioneer Services Inc.

          John H. Gutke and Tara H. Popova, Fox Rothschild LLP, Las Vegas, Nevada, for Defendant-Appellant Click Media LLC.

          Before: Sandra S. Ikuta and Andrew D. Hurwitz, Circuit Judges, and James S. Gwin, [*] District Judge.

         SUMMARY[**]

         Telephone Consumer Protection Act

         The panel affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants in a class action under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

         The plaintiff received from AC Referral, a non-party, a text message that violated the TCPA. The panel held that the defendants, three lenders and two marketing companies, were not vicariously liable for AC Referral's acts. Because AC Referral was neither the agent nor purported agent of four of the defendants, they could not have ratified AC Referral's acts. Although one of the marketing companies had an agency relationship with AC Referral, it was not bound by AC Referral's acts because it lacked knowledge that AC Referral was violating the TCPA and did not have knowledge of facts that would have led a reasonable person to investigate further.

          OPINION

          IKUTA, CIRCUIT JUDGE.

         Flemming Kristensen received a text message from AC Referral that violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), 47 U.S.C. § 227. In this class action against three lenders and two marketing companies, Kristensen claims that they had ratified the unlawful text messages. Because AC Referral (which is not a party to this suit) was neither the agent nor purported agent of four of the defendants, they cannot have ratified AC Referral's acts. See Restatement (Third) of Agency ยงยง 4.01 and 4.03 (Am. Law Inst. 2006). Although one of the marketing companies had an agency relationship with AC Referral, it is not bound by AC Referral's acts because it lacked knowledge that AC Referral was violating the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.