Plaintiff Says He’s ‘Entitled’ to Call Records Showing ‘Extent’ of Illegal ‘Calling Conduct’
Arthur Cochran is “entitled to the records necessary” to argue that Boost Health Insurance “purposely availed itself of the privilege of conducting business in Florida and is subject to personal jurisdiction” there, said Cochran’s reply Thursday (docket 4:23-cv-00473) in U.S.…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
District Court for Northern Florida in Tallahassee in support of his motion to compel discovery (see 2402230043). Boost Health knew and agreed that as part of its joint venture with vendor Work Business Solutions (WBS), the vendor “would make telemarketing calls into Florida to consumers with Florida numbers,” including plaintiff Cochran, said the reply. Boost Health’s opposition concedes that the key issue for the court’s determination about whether personal jurisdiction exists over Boost Health “is whether WBS acted as an agent for Boost,” it said. Cochran alleges that Boost Health determined what leads WBS could purchase and call, and required WBS to send it the call recipient’s contact information as part of any call that was transferred. To identify the “extent” of that illegal “calling conduct,” Cochran seeks discovery “of how many calls Boost Health received that it knew were made into Florida as part of its joint venture with WBS,” said the plaintiff’s reply.