Foxhall Realty Law Offices v. Telecom. Prem. Serv., No. 96 CV 9439 (BDP).

CourtUnited States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. Southern District of New York
Writing for the CourtParker
Citation975 F.Supp. 329
PartiesFOXHALL REALTY LAW OFFICES, INC., on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. TELECOMMUNICATIONS PREMIUM SERVICES, LTD., d/b/a TPS Call Sciences, Defendant.
Decision Date28 August 1997
Docket NumberNo. 96 CV 9439 (BDP).

Page 329

975 F.Supp. 329
FOXHALL REALTY LAW OFFICES, INC., on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff,
v.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PREMIUM SERVICES, LTD., d/b/a TPS Call Sciences, Defendant.
No. 96 CV 9439 (BDP).
United States District Court, S.D. New York.
August 28, 1997.

Page 330

Robert J. Schechter, Schechter & Nimkoff, LLP, New York City, for Plaintiffs.

Warren Anthony Fitch, Swidler & Berlin, Chtd., Washington, DC, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER

PARKER, District Judge.


Plaintiff Foxhall Realty Law Offices, Inc. ("Foxhall") brings this action against Telecommunications Premium Services, Ltd. ("TPS") alleging that TPS transmitted to it, by facsimile, an unsolicited advertisement in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 ("the Act" or "TCPA"). Before the Court is defendant's motion to dismiss, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1), for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2), for lack of personal jurisdiction. For the reasons stated below, the motion is granted.

BACKGROUND

For the purposes of this motion, the material facts alleged in the complaint are taken as true. See Newman & Schwartz v. Asplundh Tree Expert Co., 102 F.3d 660, 662 (2d Cir.1996); O'Brien v. Alexander, 101 F.3d 1479, 1484 (2d Cir.1996). TPS is a privately held telecommunications company which provides a "personal assistant" service to its customers. A TPS customer using this service is assigned a single telephone number, and his or her incoming calls on that number are routed to any of several other telephone numbers used by the customer.

Foxhall alleges that on November 5, 1996, it received, in its facsimile machine, a two-page advertisement for TPS's "personal assistant" services. Foxhall contends that the advertisement was sent without its prior express invitation or permission. Foxhall subsequently filed this putative class action suit alleging that defendant, by transmitting the unsolicited advertisement, violated 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3).

DISCUSSION

The TCPA was enacted to "protect the privacy interests of residential telephone subscribers by placing restrictions on unsolicited, automated telephone calls to the home and to facilitate interstate commerce by restricting certain uses of facsimile ([f]ax) machines and automatic dialers." International Science & Technology Inst., Inc. v. Inacom, 106 F.3d 1146, 1150 (4th Cir.1997). The TCPA prohibits the use of "any telephone facsimile machine, computer, or other device to send an unsolicited advertisement to a telephone facsimile machine." 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(C). The Act further creates a private right of action for violations of its provisions. Specifically, it provides that "a person or entity may, if otherwise permitted by the laws or rules of court of a State, bring in an appropriate court of that State ... an action based on a violation of this subsection or the regulations prescribed under this subsection to enjoin such violation." 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3).

Defendant argues that state courts have exclusive jurisdiction over private causes of action brought pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3), and that this Court, accordingly, lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this action. Our Court of Appeals has not had occasion to address this question.1 The Fourth Circuit, the only Court of Appeals that has directly confronted the issue recently held that "[w]hile Congress...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 practice notes
  • Chair King, Inc. v. Houston Cellular Corp., No. 96-20100
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • December 15, 1997
    ...York adopted the position taken by the Fourth Circuit. Foxhall Realty Law Offices, Inc. v. Telecommunications Premium Services, Ltd., 975 F.Supp. 329 (S.D.N.Y.1997). The district court for the Southern District of Indiana, however, concluded that the TCPA conferred subject matter jurisdicti......
  • Gottlieb v. Carnival Corp., No. 04-CV-4202 (ILG).
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of New York)
    • April 28, 2005
    ...pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2) for lack of personal jurisdiction. 975 F.Supp. 329, 330 (S.D.N.Y.1997). The district court held that it lacked jurisdiction over plaintiff's claim because the TCPA confers exclusive jurisdict......
  • Foxhall Realty Law Offices, Inc. v. Telecommunications Premium Services, Ltd., Docket No. 97-9147
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • September 28, 1998
    ...the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Foxhall Realty Law Offices, Inc. v. Telecommunications Premium Servs., Ltd., 975 F.Supp. 329 I. BACKGROUND Foxhall Realty Law Offices, Inc. ("Foxhall") alleges that on November 5, 1996, the defendant-appellee, Telecommunication......
  • Nicholson v. Hooters of Augusta, Inc., No. 96-9149
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • March 10, 1998
    ...of New York adopted the Fourth Circuit's approach in Foxhall Realty Law Offices, Inc. v. Telecommunications Premium Services, Ltd., 975 F.Supp. 329 (S.D.N.Y.1997). The district court of Indiana, however, ruled that the Act confers subject matter jurisdiction of private actions upon both sta......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • Chair King, Inc. v. Houston Cellular Corp., No. 96-20100
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • December 15, 1997
    ...York adopted the position taken by the Fourth Circuit. Foxhall Realty Law Offices, Inc. v. Telecommunications Premium Services, Ltd., 975 F.Supp. 329 (S.D.N.Y.1997). The district court for the Southern District of Indiana, however, concluded that the TCPA conferred subject matter jurisdicti......
  • Gottlieb v. Carnival Corp., No. 04-CV-4202 (ILG).
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of New York)
    • April 28, 2005
    ...pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2) for lack of personal jurisdiction. 975 F.Supp. 329, 330 (S.D.N.Y.1997). The district court held that it lacked jurisdiction over plaintiff's claim because the TCPA confers exclusive jurisdict......
  • Foxhall Realty Law Offices, Inc. v. Telecommunications Premium Services, Ltd., Docket No. 97-9147
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
    • September 28, 1998
    ...the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Foxhall Realty Law Offices, Inc. v. Telecommunications Premium Servs., Ltd., 975 F.Supp. 329 I. BACKGROUND Foxhall Realty Law Offices, Inc. ("Foxhall") alleges that on November 5, 1996, the defendant-appellee, Telecommunication......
  • Nicholson v. Hooters of Augusta, Inc., No. 96-9149
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • March 10, 1998
    ...of New York adopted the Fourth Circuit's approach in Foxhall Realty Law Offices, Inc. v. Telecommunications Premium Services, Ltd., 975 F.Supp. 329 (S.D.N.Y.1997). The district court of Indiana, however, ruled that the Act confers subject matter jurisdiction of private actions upon both sta......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT