IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

Amy Davis,

Plaintiff,

v.

Quicken Loans, Inc.,

Defendant.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Civil Action No.: ______

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

COMPLAINT & JURY DEMAND

For this Complaint, the Plaintiff, Amy Davis, by undersigned counsel, states as follows: 

JURISDICTION

1. This action arises out of Defendant’s repeated violations of the Telephone 

Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227, et. seq. (the “TCPA”).

2. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), in that the 

Defendant transacts business in this District and a substantial portion of the acts giving rise to 

this action occurred in this District.

PARTIES

3. The Plaintiff, Amy Davis (“Plaintiff”), is an adult individual residing in 

Prattville, Alabama, and is a “person” as the term is defined by 47 U.S.C.A. § 153(39).

4. Defendant Quicken Loans, Inc. (“Quicken Loans”), is a Michigan business entity 

with an address of 1050 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, Michigan 48226, and is a “person” as 

defined by 47 U.S.C.A. § 153(39).

Case 2:14-cv-12665-GCS-MJH ECF No. 1 filed 07/08/14 PageID.1 Page 1 of 4
FACTS

5. Within the last year, Quicken Loans placed calls to Plaintiff’s cellular telephone 

by using an automated telephone dialer system (“ATDS”) and/or by using an artificial or 

prerecorded voice. 

6. When Plaintiff answered calls from Quicken Loans, she heard a prerecorded 

message that advertised low mortgage rates and that asked her to press “1” to speak to a 

representative. 

7. Plaintiff has no business relationship with Quicken Loans and never requested by 

an agreement or otherwise that she be contacted. 

8. Plaintiff never provided her cellular telephone number to Quicken Loans and 

never provided her consent to Quicken Loans to be contacted on her cellular telephone.

9. The telephone number called by Quicken Loans was assigned to a cellular 

telephone service for which Plaintiff incurs charges for incoming calls pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 

227(b)(1).

10. The calls from Quicken Loans to Plaintiff were not placed for “emergency 

purposes” as defined by 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A)(i).

COUNT I

VIOLATIONS OF THE TELEPHONE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT –

47 U.S.C. § 227, et seq.

11. The Plaintiff incorporates by reference all of the above paragraphs of this 

Complaint as though fully stated herein.

12. Defendant’s Predictive Dialers have the capacity to store or produce telephone 

numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator.

Case 2:14-cv-12665-GCS-MJH ECF No. 1 filed 07/08/14 PageID.2 Page 2 of 4
13. Without prior consent the Defendant contacted the Plaintiff by means of 

automatic telephone calls or prerecorded messages at a cellular telephone or pager in violation of 

47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii).

14. Defendant placed these calls knowing that it lacked consent to call Plaintiff. As 

such, each call placed to Plaintiff was made in knowing and/or willful violation of the TCPA, 

and is subject to treble damages pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(C).

15. As a result of each of Defendant’s negligent violations of the TCPA, Plaintiff is

entitled to an award of $500.00 in statutory damages for each call placed in violation of the 

TCPA pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(B).

16. As a result of each of Defendant’s knowing and/or willful violations of the TCPA, 

Plaintiff is entitled to an award of treble damages in an amount up to $1,500.00 for each and 

every violation of the TCPA pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(B) and 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(C).

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff prays that judgment be entered against Defendant:

1. Statutory damages of $500.00 for each violation determined to be negligent 

pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(B);

2. Treble damages for each violation determined to be willful and/or knowing 

pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(C);

3. Such other and further relief as may be just and proper.

TRIAL BY JURY DEMANDED ON ALL COUNTS

Case 2:14-cv-12665-GCS-MJH ECF No. 1 filed 07/08/14 PageID.3 Page 3 of 4
Dated: July 8, 2014

Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ Sergei Lemberg, Esq.

Attorney for Plaintiff Amy Davis 

LEMBERG LAW L.L.C.

1100 Summer Street

Stamford, CT 06905

Telephone: (203) 653-2250

Facsimile: (888) 953-6237

Email: slemberg@lemberglaw.com

Case 2:14-cv-12665-GCS-MJH ECF No. 1 filed 07/08/14 PageID.4 Page 4 of 4