Paldo Sign and Display Co. v. Wagener Equities, Inc.

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Telephone Consumers Protection Act
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 15-1267
Decision Date: 
June 16, 2016
Federal District: 
N.D. Ill., E. Div.
Holding: 
Affirmed

In action seeking statutory damages under Telephone Consumer Protection Act, which resulted in jury finding in favor of defendant, Dist. Ct. did not err in submitting instruction to jury on issue of sender liability that required jury to resolve whether defendant had approved sending of unsolicited fax transmission by third-party, under circumstances where defendant’s representative testified that defendant had required third-party to get approval of both advertisement and individuals on contact list before sending of fax, and where defendant’s representative testified that third-party sent fax without said approvals. Instant instruction was proper since Ct., in Clark, 816 F.3d 935, rejected claim that applicable regulations called for strict liability on entity whose goods or services were advertised in unsolicited fax. Fact that Dist. Ct. allowed representative of third-party to testify that she had also been involved in “diploma mill” selling diplomas to individuals based on their work and life experiences did not violate Rule 404(a) or require new trial since such testimony properly pertained to witness’ credibility and character for untruthfulness.