Real quick, great standing case out of Atlanta earlier this month I forgot to cover.

In Hall v. Xanadu the Defendant moved to dismiss on standing grounds arguing that the Plaintiff had consented to receive the texts at issue. Normally this is not a proper argument because consent is a substantive issue and NOT a standing issue. But if it works it works.

And it did.

The Court in Hall found the Plaintiff did not dispute via a declaration providing consent. And since the motion was a factual attack on standing the Court determined Defendant was entitled to a W and dismissed the action.

Nice work!

One of the most interesting pieces of the ruling, however, is the Court’s observation that spending time determining who sent the texts and/or researching how to stop them–as if that wasn’t obvious–is not a form of harm: a Plaintiff cannot “manufacture” standing in this way per the Court.

Very interesting, no?

Decision here for the interested: 2023-07-06 (0034) ORDER GRANTING Defendant Xanadu Marketing Incs 25 Amended Motion to Dismiss