Watson v. Manhattan Luxury Automobiles, Inc. d/b/a Lexus Of Manhattan

Background

The parties filed pretrial memoranda addressing, among other things, the amount of damages available to the plaintiffs under § 227(c) of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. That provision allows a plaintiff to recover actual monetary loss or up to $500 for each violation, whichever is greater. It also allows the court, in its discretion, to award treble damages for a knowing or willful violation.

Arguments and Analysis

The plaintiffs argued that § 227(c) required an award of $500 for each violation when they were not seeking actual damages. The court rejected that argument because the statute says plaintiffs may recover “up to” $500 per violation. The court distinguished decisions awarding $500 per violation after a defendant failed to participate in the case, explaining that this case would proceed to trial.

The plaintiffs also argued that the judge, rather than a jury, had to decide the statutory damages amount. The court rejected that argument as well. It noted that courts had decided damages themselves in default-judgment cases because no jury was involved, while courts in other federal circuits had allowed juries to decide damages under § 227(c).

The court further noted that it had previously granted summary judgment to Manhattan Luxury Automobiles on the plaintiffs’ claim for treble damages. That earlier ruling found that no reasonable factfinder could conclude that the defendant knowingly or willfully violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and its regulations.

Ruling

Judge Lorna G. Schofield ordered that, at trial, the plaintiffs may recover “up to” $500 in damages per violation, with the amount to be determined by the jury. The order did not award a specific damages amount.