Skip to Content
Menu Toggle
New TCPA Ruling Likely Expands Compliance Obligations for Business Text Messaging in Florida and Beyond
subscribe to legal alerts

subscribe to our blogs

sign up now

Media Contacts

Charles B. Jimerson
Managing Partner

Jimerson Birr welcomes inquiries from the media and do our best to respond to deadlines. If you are interested in speaking to a Jimerson Birr lawyer or want general information about the firm, our practice areas, lawyers, publications, or events, please contact us via email or telephone for assistance at (904) 389-0050.

New TCPA Ruling Likely Expands Compliance Obligations for Business Text Messaging in Florida and Beyond

August 22, 2025 Cross-Industry Legal Blog

Reading Time: 6 minutes


In July 2025, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania issued a decision in Newell v. JR Capital that should immediately capture the attention of businesses using text messaging to market products or services. The ruling confirms that marketing texts are subject to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act’s (TCPA) “Caller ID” requirements (47 C.F.R. § 64.1601(e))—and, critically, that consumers can sue for violations, even when they consented to receive the messages.

It is important to note that this ruling is binding only within the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and not automatically controlling in other jurisdictions, including Florida. But that distinction should not be seen as a free pass but, instead, a warning. Courts around the country often look to each other when facing unsettled questions of federal law, and Newell offers a detailed roadmap for plaintiffs’ attorneys and judges alike. The decision significantly increases the likelihood that other courts will adopt the same reasoning—and plaintiffs’ firms are unlikely to wait for local precedent before filing copycat cases.

This decision sets the stage for a likely wave of new lawsuits. Plaintiffs’ firms are already attuned to spotting technical violations in marketing campaigns, and Caller ID compliance is now a new line of attack. For small and mid-size businesses, the message is straightforward: texting practices must be updated now to avoid costly litigation.

The TCPA and Its Caller ID Requirements

First, though, any business not already aware of the TCPA’s Caller ID requirements needs a foundation in what those are to understand why they matter. 

The TCPA itself is a federal statute passed by Congress in 1991. Like most federal laws, it doesn’t spell out every detail of compliance. Instead, Congress gave the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) the authority to write regulations that “fill in the gaps” and establish the technical and procedural rules businesses must follow. Those regulations are codified in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), which functions as the operating manual for how the statute is enforced day-to-day.

When a regulation is issued under a section of the TCPA that allows private lawsuits, violating that regulation can itself give rise to a private cause of action, that’s what the court confirmed in Newell: the Caller ID regulations, 47 C.F.R. § 64.1601(e), was issued under the part of the TCPA that explicitly authorizes private lawsuits, making it enforceable by consumers in court.

What the Caller ID Regulation Requires

The Caller ID requirements, found at 47 C.F.R. § 64.1601(e), apply broadly to telemarketing—including marketing text messages. To comply, each marketing text must:

  • Clearly identify the sender. The business’s actual name must appear in the body of the text. Abbreviations, domains, or URLs—even if they link directly to the company’s website—do not suffice.
  • Provide a valid call-back number. Each text must include a working customer service number that is staffed during normal business hours and available for do-not-call requests.
  • Transmit accurate caller ID information. The associated caller ID must show a calling party number (CPN/ANI) along with the business’s name or, if using a third-party telemarketer, the seller’s name and call-back number.

The FCC has deliberately excluded website links as a substitute for disclosure. The regulation is designed to give consumers immediate, trustworthy information about who is contacting them and how they can respond.

Third Party Vendors and Automated Platforms: Hidden Compliance Risks 

Compliance with the Caller ID regulation is not limited to texts that a business sends directly. Many companies rely on third-party vendors to manage marketing campaigns or use automated messaging platforms that operate with minimal oversight. Both scenarios create additional exposure.

When a business contracts with a third party to send messages on its behalf, plaintiffs can still pursue the business under a theory of vicarious liability. Courts look past labels like “independent contractor” and focus instead on the practical realities: who benefited from the texts, who controlled the campaign, and whether the sender appeared to act for the business. If the third party fails to include the required name, call-back number, or caller ID information, the business itself may still face suit.

The same is true of automated platforms. Many texting tools are designed for convenience and scale, but that ease of use can also mean templates and workflows that do not satisfy Caller ID requirements out of the box. Businesses using such platforms must audit their automations now to ensure every message complies with all relevant regulations.

Put simply: a business cannot insulate itself from TCPA liability by outsourcing or automating. Whether messages are sent in-house, through a vendor, or by software, the compliance obligation—and the risk—ultimately falls on the business.

Why This Matters for Small and Mid-Size Businesses

For businesses, especially those with lean compliance budgets, text messaging has long been a cost-effective marketing tool as long as it is wielded responsibly and does not violate the TCPA. Newell changes the risk calculation even further. Violations of the Caller ID rule may expose companies to individual lawsuits, class actions, and statutory damages of $500 to $1,500 per message. 

Because courts in other jurisdictions, including Florida, may very well follow Newell’s reasoning, companies cannot afford to wait for local precedent. Updating text campaigns now is the best protection against being an early target of this new category of claims.

Key Takeaway

Every marketing text must include the business’s name, a valid call-back number, and proper caller ID transmission. Anything less—such as relying on a website link or omitting clear identification—creates liability.

While these adjustments may seem minor, they can mean the difference between compliant, effective marketing and costly litigation. Proactive compliance today will not only reduce legal risk but also strengthen consumer trust in your brand.

If your business uses text messaging to connect with customers, now is the time to act. Contact Jimerson Birr to review your current practices, enhance compliance measures, and protect your business from potential liability. Our attorneys have represented dozens of companies in TCPA litigation and can help safeguard your marketing efforts and ensure your text messaging strategy meets legal requirements.

Sources:

MEMORANDUM AND/OR OPINION. SIGNED BY DISTRICT JUDGE GERALD A. MCHUGH ON 7/16/2025. 7/17/2025 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(sg)

we’re here to help

Contact Us

CONTACT US
Jimerson Birr