{"id":1326,"date":"2017-06-22T13:32:19","date_gmt":"2017-06-22T17:32:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/?p=1326"},"modified":"2017-06-22T13:32:19","modified_gmt":"2017-06-22T17:32:19","slug":"court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/2017\/06\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\/","title":{"rendered":"Court Denies Raymour &#038; Flanigan\u2019s Motion to Compel Arbitration in TCPA Class Action Case"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>On February 16, 2017, a class action lawsuit was filed by Fitapelli &amp; Schaffer, LLP and Terrell Marshall Law Group PLLC against Raymour &amp; Flanigan (\u201cRaymour\u201d) for allegedly violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) by sending text messages to recipients\u2019 cellular phones without their prior written consent. \u00a0The TCPA makes it unlawful to make any calls, send any text messages, and\/or send any faxes to a person or business, for commercial reasons, without that person\u2019s express written consent.\u00a0 Each recipient of an unlawful call, text message, and\/or fax, may receive a statutory penalty of at least $500 (up to $1,500) for each violation.<\/p>\n<p>The lawsuit asserted TCPA violations on behalf of the Plaintiff and a nationwide class of customers who received text messages on their cell phones by Raymour. In response to the lawsuit, Raymour moved to compel arbitration of the lawsuit, meaning that the case could not be brought in court and could not be brought as a class action.\u00a0 The furniture company argued that the TCPA claim was subject to mandatory arbitration due to a sales ticket that Plaintiff signed while buying a bedroom furniture set almost 3 years prior to receiving any text message.<\/p>\n<p>On June 21, 2017, Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn ruled that Plaintiff\u2019s TCPA claims would not be subject to the mandatory arbitration agreement, and that the case can continue as a class action.\u00a0 Specifically, the Court found that the Arbitration Agreement signed by the Plaintiff was limited to specific disputes arising out of or relating to \u201cthe goods and\/or services \u2026 purchased\u201d from Raymour and that the TCPA claims \u201c[have] nothing to do with the bedroom furniture set [Plaintiff] purchased\u201d in 2014.\u00a0 In addition, because the class action waiver in the arbitration agreement only applies to arbitrable claims, Plaintiff\u2019s TCPA can continue as a class action.\u00a0 You can also view the order <u><a href=\"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/R-and-R-Denying-Mot-to-Compel-Arb-6.21.17.pdf\">here<\/a>.<\/u><\/p>\n<p>If you feel you may be affected by this lawsuit, or have any questions, please give Fitapelli &amp; Schaffer, LLP a call at (212) 300-0375.<\/p>\n<p>The lawyers of Fitapelli &amp; Schaffer, LLP represent everyday people who have faced unwanted and endless telemarketing calls at home, their business, and\/or on their mobile devices. If you are receiving unwanted telemarketing calls and want to stop them as soon as possible, then please call the lawyers of Fitapelli &amp; Schaffer, LLP, (212) 300-0375, to schedule a free consultation. Or for more information, visit our website <a href=\"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">fslawfirm.com.<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>On February 16, 2017, a class action lawsuit was filed by Fitapelli &amp; Schaffer, LLP and Terrell Marshall Law Group PLLC against Raymour &amp; Flanigan (\u201cRaymour\u201d) for allegedly violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) by sending text messages to recipients\u2019 cellular phones without their prior written consent. \u00a0The TCPA makes it unlawful to make any calls, send any text messages, and\/or send any faxes to a person or business, for commercial reasons, without that person\u2019s express written consent.\u00a0 Each &#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[42],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1326","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-tcpa"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Court Denies Raymour &amp; Flanigan\u2019s Motion to Compel Arbitration in TCPA Class Action Case<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/2017\/06\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Court Denies Raymour &amp; Flanigan\u2019s Motion to Compel Arbitration in TCPA Class Action Case\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"On February 16, 2017, a class action lawsuit was filed by Fitapelli &amp; Schaffer, LLP and Terrell Marshall Law Group PLLC against Raymour &amp; Flanigan (\u201cRaymour\u201d) for allegedly violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) by sending text messages to recipients\u2019 cellular phones without their prior written consent. \u00a0The TCPA makes it unlawful to make any calls, send any text messages, and\/or send any faxes to a person or business, for commercial reasons, without that person\u2019s express written consent.\u00a0 Each ...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/2017\/06\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"New York Employment Lawyer\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/FSLawFirm\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2017-06-22T17:32:19+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/01\/FSLaw_Logo_Blue_FB.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"300\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"300\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"bschaffer\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"bschaffer\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/2017\\\/06\\\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/2017\\\/06\\\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"bschaffer\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/749a268f980a6cee82fa2f713ef54852\"},\"headline\":\"Court Denies Raymour &#038; Flanigan\u2019s Motion to Compel Arbitration in TCPA Class Action Case\",\"datePublished\":\"2017-06-22T17:32:19+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/2017\\\/06\\\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":414,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"TCPA\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/2017\\\/06\\\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/2017\\\/06\\\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\\\/\",\"name\":\"Court Denies Raymour & Flanigan\u2019s Motion to Compel Arbitration in TCPA Class Action Case\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2017-06-22T17:32:19+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/2017\\\/06\\\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/2017\\\/06\\\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/2017\\\/06\\\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Court Denies Raymour &#038; Flanigan\u2019s Motion to Compel Arbitration in TCPA Class Action Case\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"New York Employment Lawyer\",\"description\":\"New York City Employment Law News\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Fitapelli & Schaffer, LLP\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2019\\\/02\\\/fitapelli-schaffer-llp.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2019\\\/02\\\/fitapelli-schaffer-llp.png\",\"width\":330,\"height\":210,\"caption\":\"Fitapelli & Schaffer, LLP\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/FSLawFirm\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/wagelawyer\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.instagram.com\\\/fitapelliandschaffer\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.linkedin.com\\\/in\\\/bssnyls\\\/\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/749a268f980a6cee82fa2f713ef54852\",\"name\":\"bschaffer\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/ca8f5f199884a5a6f92f9c562b13c779361bb6133d0666af67111ea485636d73?s=96&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/ca8f5f199884a5a6f92f9c562b13c779361bb6133d0666af67111ea485636d73?s=96&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/ca8f5f199884a5a6f92f9c562b13c779361bb6133d0666af67111ea485636d73?s=96&r=g\",\"caption\":\"bschaffer\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.fslawfirm.com\\\/blog\\\/author\\\/bschaffer\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Court Denies Raymour & Flanigan\u2019s Motion to Compel Arbitration in TCPA Class Action Case","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/2017\/06\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Court Denies Raymour & Flanigan\u2019s Motion to Compel Arbitration in TCPA Class Action Case","og_description":"On February 16, 2017, a class action lawsuit was filed by Fitapelli &amp; Schaffer, LLP and Terrell Marshall Law Group PLLC against Raymour &amp; Flanigan (\u201cRaymour\u201d) for allegedly violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) by sending text messages to recipients\u2019 cellular phones without their prior written consent. \u00a0The TCPA makes it unlawful to make any calls, send any text messages, and\/or send any faxes to a person or business, for commercial reasons, without that person\u2019s express written consent.\u00a0 Each ...","og_url":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/2017\/06\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\/","og_site_name":"New York Employment Lawyer","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/FSLawFirm","article_published_time":"2017-06-22T17:32:19+00:00","og_image":[{"width":300,"height":300,"url":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/01\/FSLaw_Logo_Blue_FB.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"bschaffer","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"bschaffer","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/2017\/06\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/2017\/06\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\/"},"author":{"name":"bschaffer","@id":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/749a268f980a6cee82fa2f713ef54852"},"headline":"Court Denies Raymour &#038; Flanigan\u2019s Motion to Compel Arbitration in TCPA Class Action Case","datePublished":"2017-06-22T17:32:19+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/2017\/06\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\/"},"wordCount":414,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/#organization"},"articleSection":["TCPA"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/2017\/06\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\/","url":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/2017\/06\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\/","name":"Court Denies Raymour & Flanigan\u2019s Motion to Compel Arbitration in TCPA Class Action Case","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2017-06-22T17:32:19+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/2017\/06\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/2017\/06\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/2017\/06\/court-denies-raymour-flanigans-motion-compel-arbitration-tcpa-class-action-case\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Court Denies Raymour &#038; Flanigan\u2019s Motion to Compel Arbitration in TCPA Class Action Case"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/","name":"New York Employment Lawyer","description":"New York City Employment Law News","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/#organization","name":"Fitapelli & Schaffer, LLP","url":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/fitapelli-schaffer-llp.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/fitapelli-schaffer-llp.png","width":330,"height":210,"caption":"Fitapelli & Schaffer, LLP"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/FSLawFirm","https:\/\/x.com\/wagelawyer","https:\/\/www.instagram.com\/fitapelliandschaffer\/","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/in\/bssnyls\/"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/749a268f980a6cee82fa2f713ef54852","name":"bschaffer","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/ca8f5f199884a5a6f92f9c562b13c779361bb6133d0666af67111ea485636d73?s=96&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/ca8f5f199884a5a6f92f9c562b13c779361bb6133d0666af67111ea485636d73?s=96&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/ca8f5f199884a5a6f92f9c562b13c779361bb6133d0666af67111ea485636d73?s=96&r=g","caption":"bschaffer"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com"],"url":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/author\/bschaffer\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1326","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1326"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1326\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1328,"href":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1326\/revisions\/1328"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1326"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1326"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fslawfirm.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1326"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}