Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Madden v. Ally Financial Inc.

United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Central Division, Lexington

June 2, 2017

DAWN MADDEN, Plaintiff,
v.
ALLY FINANCIAL INC., Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

          Joseph M. Hood, Senior U.S. District Judge

         This matter is before the Court upon Defendant Ally Financial Inc.'s (“Ally's”) Motion to Compel Arbitration [DE 18]. For the reasons stated herein, Defendant's motion will be GRANTED.

         Facts and Procedural Background

         This case arises from a dispute over Defendant's attempts to collect a debt from Plaintiff. On June 1, 2016, Plaintiff filed a Complaint alleging Defendant called her cell phone repeatedly, after she revoked her consent to be contacted, and that these calls violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), 47 U.S.C. § 227 [DE 1]. Defendant filed an Answer on July 8, 2016 [DE 9]. Regarding jurisdiction and venue, Plaintiff alleged:

2. Jurisdiction of this court arises under 47 U.S.C. § 227.
3. Venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(2), in that a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this District.
4. Defendant transacts business here, therefore, personal jurisdiction is established.

[DE 1, Complaint, ¶¶ 2-4].

         In response to the allegations in the Complaint as to Jurisdiction and Venue, the defendant answered:

2. The allegations set forth in Paragraph 2 are legal conclusions, which are not subject to denial or admission. To the extent a response is required, and to the extent the allegations are contrary to the law, they are denied.
3. The allegations set forth in Paragraph 3 are legal conclusions, which are not subject to denial or admission. To the extent a response is required, and to the extent the allegations are contrary to the law, they are denied.
4. The allegations set forth in Paragraph 4 are legal conclusions, which are not subject to denial or admission. To the extent a response is required, and to the extent the allegations are contrary to the law, they are denied.

[DE 9, Answer, ¶¶ 2-4]. The defendant also asserted the following affirmative defenses in its Answer:

1. The Complaint fails to state a plausible claim for which relief can be granted and should be dismissed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12. See Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007); Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009). Ally reserves the right to file a Motion for Judgment on the ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.