Corporate Officers Can't Be Held Liable for TCPA Violations, Says Avid President

May by the attorneys general of 48 states (see 2305240010). The complaint alleged Avid Telecom and executives Michael Lansky and Stacey Reeves facilitated robocalls or helped others make them. It alleged the defendants received 329 notifications from the USTelecom-led Industry Traceback Group, putting them “on notice” that Avid was transmitting illegal robocalls. The AGs seek a permanent injunction preventing defendants from initiating or transmitting illegal robocalls to U.S. consumers and from transmitting calls that violate the TSR, plus an award of damages of $1,500 per Title 47 violation, civil penalties of $10,000 and state penalties. Referencing what he called a “growing trend of caselaw,” Lansky noted Perrong v. Chase Data, in which the 3rd U.S. Circuit Appeals Court, citing City Select Auto Sales v. David Randall Associates, dismissed all TCPA claims vs. an individual business owner, raising doubt as to whether “common-law-personal participation liability is available against corporate officers under the TCPA.” Since the City Select ruling, courts in the 3rd Circuit have found that "a corporate officer is not liable under the TCPA common law personal liability principles,” said the supplement, noting KHS Corp. v. Singer Financial Corp. The defendants “acknowledge that the Perrong case is not binding precedent” on the court, but said the legal analysis it contains “is sound and reflects the growing view in courts across the country that the TCPA does not and cannot create personal liability in corporate officers for the allegedly illegal conduct of the company,” it said. The defendants request that claims against each of them in their individual capacities should be dismissed with prejudice.