2
New Articles
Find Your Next Job !
If a consumer responds “Stop” to a text message does that mean you have to stop calling the consumer as well? According to one federal judge in Florida the answer may be “yes.”
In Zagury v. Puragin Water, 2026 WL 2299332 (S.D. Fl. Aug. 11, 2026) the plaintiff alleged she revoked her consent to be contacted when she replied “stop” to an SMS message.
While the defendant appeared to concede the stop was sufficient revocation of SMS message consent it moved to dismiss the complaint as to calls placed after the SMS stop request. In the defendant’s view calls can continue even after a stop request because the stop should apply only to the SMS channel.
The Court disagreed.
Citing the FCC’s recent handiwork on TCPA revocation the court found stop response is enough to require a business to stop calling in addition to SMS unless the consumer responds to a one time text confirmation clarifying the scope of the revocation is limited to SMS.
The only problem is the Court cited a portion of the FCC’s rule– the so-called nuclear revocation rule– that is not yet in effect (and hopefully never goes into effect.)
The Court noted that certain portions of the FCC’s revocation rule have been delayed but, for some reason, concluded this portion of the rule was not (it was.)
More importantly, perhaps, the Court also cited the older 2015 “any reasonable means” rule to hold a fact finder must look at the totality of the circumstances to assess the validity of a revocation– which must be done at a later part of the case. This is probably correct although none of these FCC rulings are binding any more after Loper Bright and McLaughlin.
So where does this leave us?
Without question some courts will hold a stop request will apply across channels. Whether that conclusion is well founded is sort of irrelevant– if you want to avoid suits you may want to be conservative here.
Additionally in the context of marketing messages some courts have held a “stop” request is sufficient to constitute a DNC request and require a business to list the consumer’s number on their internal DNC list. So its definitely a good idea for all marketing calls to stop if a consumer opts out of SMS.
We’ll keep an eye on all of this.
More Upcoming Events
Sign Up for any (or all) of our 25+ Newsletters
You are responsible for reading, understanding, and agreeing to the National Law Review’s (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free-to-use, no-log-in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates, or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys, or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.
Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com intended to be a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional. NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us.
Under certain state laws, the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.
The National Law Review – National Law Forum LLC 2070 Green Bay Rd., Suite 178, Highland Park, IL 60035 Telephone (708) 357-3317 or toll-free (877) 357-3317. If you would like to contact us via email please click here.
Copyright ©2026 National Law Forum, LLC
Find Your Next Job !
If a consumer responds “Stop” to a text message does that mean you have to stop calling the consumer as well? According to one federal judge in Florida the answer may be “yes.”
In Zagury v. Puragin Water, 2026 WL 2299332 (S.D. Fl. Aug. 11, 2026) the plaintiff alleged she revoked her consent to be contacted when she replied “stop” to an SMS message.
While the defendant appeared to concede the stop was sufficient revocation of SMS message consent it moved to dismiss the complaint as to calls placed after the SMS stop request. In the defendant’s view calls can continue even after a stop request because the stop should apply only to the SMS channel.
The Court disagreed.
Citing the FCC’s recent handiwork on TCPA revocation the court found stop response is enough to require a business to stop calling in addition to SMS unless the consumer responds to a one time text confirmation clarifying the scope of the revocation is limited to SMS.
The only problem is the Court cited a portion of the FCC’s rule– the so-called nuclear revocation rule– that is not yet in effect (and hopefully never goes into effect.)
The Court noted that certain portions of the FCC’s revocation rule have been delayed but, for some reason, concluded this portion of the rule was not (it was.)
More importantly, perhaps, the Court also cited the older 2015 “any reasonable means” rule to hold a fact finder must look at the totality of the circumstances to assess the validity of a revocation– which must be done at a later part of the case. This is probably correct although none of these FCC rulings are binding any more after Loper Bright and McLaughlin.
So where does this leave us?
Without question some courts will hold a stop request will apply across channels. Whether that conclusion is well founded is sort of irrelevant– if you want to avoid suits you may want to be conservative here.
Additionally in the context of marketing messages some courts have held a “stop” request is sufficient to constitute a DNC request and require a business to list the consumer’s number on their internal DNC list. So its definitely a good idea for all marketing calls to stop if a consumer opts out of SMS.
We’ll keep an eye on all of this.
More Upcoming Events
Sign Up for any (or all) of our 25+ Newsletters
You are responsible for reading, understanding, and agreeing to the National Law Review’s (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free-to-use, no-log-in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates, or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys, or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.
Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com intended to be a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional. NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us.
Under certain state laws, the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.
The National Law Review – National Law Forum LLC 2070 Green Bay Rd., Suite 178, Highland Park, IL 60035 Telephone (708) 357-3317 or toll-free (877) 357-3317. If you would like to contact us via email please click here.
Copyright ©2026 National Law Forum, LLC