Sellers that rely on third-party lead suppliers are frequently facing trumped up lawsuits that are either entirely manufactured—or enhanced—by deceptive conduct by a Plaintiff (often a repeat litigator.)
Well, the case of Hastings v. Smartmatch, Case no. 4:22-cv-00228, 2022 WL 4002625 (E.D. Ark. 09/01/2022), opens the door to an exciting possibility that lead buyers—particularly companies accepting warm transfers—might actually be able to sue the Plaintiff in such suits, neutralizing one of the biggest headaches facing direct to consumer marketers.
In Hastings, the Plaintiff filed a TCPA lawsuit in the US District Court (E.D. Arkansas, Central Division) against SmartMatch Insurance Agency, LLC. SmartMatch then filed a counterclaim alleging fraud on the part of Mr. Hastings. Mr. Hastings, in turn, filed a Motion to Dismiss which was ultimately granted in part, but the Court certainly did not turn this away as a complete impossibility, and that’s the key take away here.
To break this case down, let’s start with the general facts leading up to the crossclaim:
SmartMatch alleged that Mr. Hastings or his agent went to a third-party site and put in a FALSE name, his phone number, and the address to his dad’s former business. The person who filled in that information consented to receive prerecorded calls regarding health insurance quotes by clicking submit. In reliance on this fraudulent information and consent, an unidentified company—not the owner of the...
The author and behavioural scientist, Gad Saad, has just published a book on what he calls “suicidal empathy”. He says that “a society dies when it cares more about exhibiting infinite tolerance a...