Corporate

AGA offering new service for companies seeking government contracts

ANSELL GRIMM & AARON, P.C. is excited to announce a professional alliance with REMTC, Inc. to provide a new service in the field of security compliance for government contracting work.

REMTC, Inc. has over 20 years of experience and a tremendous success rate in providing consulting services to government contractors large and small to ensure compliance with all applicable eligibility regulations for government contracts and to secure and maintain security clearances. With new regulations coming into effect, even companies with existing contracts and security clearances will need to ensure compliance with the new regulatory framework. Ansell Grimm & Aaron, PC attorneys can assist clients in navigating this complex process to achieve the necessary compliance and security clearances to obtain lucrative government contract work.

For more information or assistance regarding our services, please contact Michael H. Ansell, Esq. in the firm’s Woodland Park office at (973) 247-9000 or by email at mha@62q.f7d.myftpupload.com. Additional information concerning REMTC may be found at www.remtcs.com.

AGA Obtains Dismissal of Class Action Suit Relying on
U.S. Supreme Court’s Recent Spokeo Decision

ANSELL GRIMM & AARON, PC recently secured the dismissal, with prejudice, of a federal class action complaint alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, 47 U.S.C. § 227 et seq. (“TCPA”), in accord with recent United States Supreme Court precedent embodied in the seminal case of Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016). This marked a significant victory for our client in one of the first cases in the nation to apply Spokeo to dismiss a putative class action for lack of standing.

Specifically, Plaintiff in Susinno v. Work Out World, No. 3:15-civ-05881(PGS)(TJB), alleged that our client made a single, unanswered, auto-dialed call which went to voicemail. Plaintiff further alleged that the call violated the TCPA because it was made without her express, written consent. In granting our motion to dismiss, the Court primarily relied on the Supreme Court’s Spokeo decision.

In Spokeo, the plaintiff alleged violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act whereby defendant Spokeo allegedly disseminated mistaken personal information about him. The Court found that while there may have been procedural violations of the statute, it was unclear whether the plaintiff suffered an “injury in fact” — requiring both “particularized” harm specific to him and a “concrete” injury that actually exists. Specifically, the Court found that while the lower court considered the particularized requirement, it failed to consider concreteness. At its core, the ruling considered whether bare, procedural violations of a statute alone “entail a degree of risk sufficient to meet the concreteness requirement” establishing an actual injury.

Applying the Spokeo Court’s reasoning, The Honorable Peter G. Sheridan held that the purpose of the TCPA was to prevent repeated, annoying, and harassing calls to consumers. The Court concluded that a single, unanswered voicemail did not satisfy this standard. The Court further held that in the absence of any annoyance or related harm to Plaintiff resulting from the single call, she did not suffer a “concrete” injury sufficient to satisfy the elements of an “injury in fact” foreclosing her standing to assert the claims. As a result, dismissal was warranted.

Plaintiffs class action attorneys file TCPA complaints because the statute provides for damages of $500 per call ($1,500 for willful violations) plus attorneys’ fees and costs. Since the TCPA was amended, effective October 16, 2013, making it more onerous for businesses, class action litigation based on the statute increased more than 1000% nationwide.

ANSELL GRIMM & AARON, PC is aware that many of our clients rely on various forms of communication to connect with consumers toward generating business. Services providing auto-dialed, “robo-calls” can contact thousands of consumers in a single day. However, the risks of dong so are manifold as it is critical that business carefully adhere to the provisions of the TCPA to avoid exposure to significant statutory liability. Oftentimes, this simply may be achieved by including particular contractual language.

If you have questions about the case, or the TCPA in general, please contact Joshua S. Bauchner, Esq. at (973) 247-9000 or jb@62q.f7d.myftpupload.com.

AG&A attorneys challenging opposition
to QuickChek and WaWa projects

Ansell Grimm & Aaron, PC attorneys have filed a federal antitrust complaint asserting claims arising from the attempted monopolization of the gas station convenience store market in the Borough of Eatontown, New Jersey.  The action was filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey captioned Fidelity Eatontown, LLC and QuickChek Corporation v. Excellency Enterprise, LLC, Kennedy Auto Service, Inc., and Gas Of Eatontown, Inc., Docket No. 3:16-cv-03899-FLW-LHG.

Specifically, the Complaint alleges that Defendants engaged in sham litigations and frivolous and pre-textual appeals of planning board, governing body, and State agency actions to prevent the development of competing gas station convenience stores thereby preserving their monopoly position.  The Complaint further alleges that as a result of the series of sham petitions and legal actions filed by Defendants, Plaintiffs have been forced to pay thousands of dollars toward application fees, expert fees, and attorney fees to pursue land use approvals and have suffered lost profits and other costs associated with the delay in construction resulting from the Defendants’ willful and abusive tactics.

The action is predicated on a recent decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Hanover 3201 Realty, LLC. v. Village Supermarkets, Inc., 806 F.3d 162 (3d Cir. 2015), which upheld a developer’s antitrust claims arising out of the sham litigations and other anticompetitive acts undertaken by an objector — akin to those actions allegedly taken by Defendants here — to unlawfully block development.

We know that many of our developer clients face similar, frivolous opposition when seeking land use approvals for their projects — compelling them to incur significant expense and suffer interminable delay.  While ANSELL GRIMM & AARON, PC attorneys strive to amicably resolve objector concerns, we also remain ready to challenge sham objectors in defense of our clients’ rights, as here.

 

* * *

For more than 85 years, ANSELL GRIMM & AARON, PC has been dedicated to providing excellent legal representation.  In providing zealous advocacy and skilled legal advice to our diverse clientele, our attorneys all practice with a common philosophy… commitment to excellence and commitment to people.  For additional information concerning this release, please contact Joshua S. Bauchner, Esq. or Michael H. Ansell, Esq. at (973) 247-9000.

AGA Partner Josh Bauchner quoted by Law360 on Copycat suit against Fitness Center Client

Ansell Grimm & Aaron PC partner Josh Bauchner, a member of the Litigation and Bankruptcy departments of AGA, was recently quoted by Law360. Bauchner represents Fitness center chain Club Metro USA LLC in a proposed class action which Bauchner termed a copycat suit which has been brought against other gyms in New Jersey and is without merit. The story is available here. (registration is required to read the full article)