In early November, plaintiff Thomas Estrella and defendant, LTD Financial Services (a debt collector) stood before court under the claim made by the plaintiff that the defendant was in violation of The Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). Estrella stated that phone calls were being made to him using an automated telephone dialing system, otherwise known as ATDS, by LTD without consent.
After the claim was made, the defended argued for a partial summary, stating that the calls were not made using ATDS and therefore, did not violate TCPA. The senior vice president of LTD testified in support of their statement, claiming that the phone calls were manually made by LTD employees with the use of a “point and click function.” Still, the plaintiff continued with his claim saying he “could tell” that ATDS were being used because there was a “prolonged silence” upon answering the phone, as well as “delays and clicks.” He submitted this in an unsworn declaration, that later on was discussed by the court.
The court was unsure on if Estrella’s unsworn declaration was considerable, given the summary judgment stage, so it was concluded that his claim gave no reasoning nor evidence of LTD’s use of ATDS during the phone calls he received; Estrella’s evidence “cannot consist of conclusory allegations or legal conclusions” (Avirgan v. Hull, 932 F.2d at 1577). Therefore, a summary judgment was granted in favor of the defendant in the case of Thomas Estrella v. LTD Financial Services, LP.