11th Circuit Appellant Submits Dickson Opinion as Supplemental Authority

The June 1 opinion of the 6th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court in Dickson v. Direct Energy, reversing the district court’s decision to grant Direct Energy’s motion to dismiss a Telephone Consumer Protection Act complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction (see 2306020041), supports plaintiff-appellant Stephen Muccio’s arguments for a similar reversal of a lower court’s dismissal in favor of defendant Global Motivation, Muccio’s counsel wrote the 11th Circuit Monday (docket 23-10081). Muccio is appealing the lower court’s decision that he failed to allege the concrete injury required to establish Article III standing when Global Motivation and its CEO Jordan Belfort sent him unsolicited telemarketing texts. The 6th Circuit said receipt of a single voicemail confers Article III standing “because it bears a sufficiently close relationship to the common law harm imposed by intrusions upon seclusion,” said Muccio’s attorney. “The same is true here.” As such, Muccio submits Dickson as supplemental authority, he said.