Mo. Judge Dismisses TCPA Claims vs. Doe Defendants for Lack of Specificity
U.S. District Judge Ronnie White for Eastern Missouri in St. Louis dismissed Daniel Human's claims against defendants John and Jane Does 1 through 4 in the plaintiff's amended Telephone Consumer Protection Act complaint against BMW of West St. Louis, said…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
the judge’s signed memorandum and order of partial dismissal Friday (docket 4:23-cv-01577). Human alleges the dealership and the Doe defendants made unwanted calls to his cellphone number in violation of the TCPA and Missouri’s No Call List (see 2312110003). But a plaintiff may not bring claims against a fictitious party, though an action may proceed against a party whose name is unknown if the complaint makes allegations specific enough to permit the identity of the party to be ascertained after reasonable discovery, said the judge’s order. The judge has reviewed the allegations against the Doe defendants and finds the amended complaint doesn’t sufficiently allege who the Doe defendants are, what their positions were, or other facts that would permit the Doe defendants to be noticed or identified through discovery, it said. Human describes the Doe defendants as telemarketers, vendors, agents, call center employees or supervisors “who called him on unspecified dates and times,” it said. He fails to make allegations that are “adequately specific” to allow identification of these defendants "and, therefore, dismissal without prejudice is appropriate,” it said.