Ira Holtzman, CPA etc. v. Turza

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting plaintiff-class representative’s motion for summary judgment in class action alleging that defendant-attorney violated Telephone Consumer Protection Act by sending more than 200 CPAs unsolicited fax sheets containing business advice, as well as information about defendant’s availability to provide legal services. Ct. rejected defendant’s claim that instant fax sheets did not contain “advertisements,” where 75% of information in said sheets constituted business advice, and record otherwise contained sufficient evidence regarding identity of recipients, as well as number of faxes sent to said recipients, so as to satisfy requirements for class action treatment of case. However, Dist. Ct. erred in transferring any residue of any unclaimed funds to charity, where there had not been any determination as to whether defendant would be able to satisfy instant $4.125 million judgment, or as to how any unclaimed funds should be used for class’s benefit.