HeyJaredOliver Shapiro
- Indexed articles, last 90 days
- 4
- Latest publication
- Sep 23, 2026
- Outlet visibility, for natlawreview.com
- Top 1M sites
- Earliest in this view
- Jul 22, 2026
Latest articles
CONSENT, NOW STARRING HOLLYWOOD: Telecom Wrote This Playbook, Hollywood’s Just Reading It (opens the original)
Read excerpt
I have spent a good chunk of my career sitting on a few very different sides of a similar table. These days I defend companies against TCPA and CIPA claims, where the entire fight usually comes down to one question, did this person actually agree to be contacted or recorded this way. Before that, I worked in entertainment transactions, negotiating talent deals where the entire fight usually came down to one question, did this person actually agree to have their name, face, voice, or general like
HOLDING COMPANY HOLDS ITS GROUND: N.D. Alabama Grant’s USHealth Group’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (opens the original)
Read excerpt
Every TCPA defense lawyer has had the same conversation with a client who’s just been sued alongside their own subsidiary. The client says something alone the lines of “but we didn’t make any calls, our subsidiary did.” And the client is often right, but that alone rarely ends the conversation because plaintiffs love to argue that a parent company should answer for whatever its subsidiary did somewhere far from home. Well, a federal court in Alabama just gave a clean and well-reasoned answer to
THE SEESAW BATTLE CONTINUES- Another New Jersey Court Says Texts Are “Calls,” but the Decision’s Reasoning is Hard to Defend and the Map Doesn’t Change (opens the original)
Read excerpt
You all know the battle that we have been following in the wake of Loper Bright Enters. v. Raimondo, 603 U.S. 369 (2024) and McLaughlin Chiropractic Assocs., Inc. v. McKesson Corp., 606 U.S. 146 (2025). Well, another New Jersey federal court just held that text messages are “telephone calls” under 227(c)(5) but the map that you are all too familiar with does not change as a result. The case is Owen-Brooks v. Better Homes & Gardens Real Estate, LLC, No. 25-15801, 2026 WL 2455150 (D.N.J. Aug. 21,
A VERY BITTER PILL TO SWALLOW – Vivek Shah Declared a Vexatious Litigant (opens the original)
Read excerpt
Twenty-nine lawsuits in under five years. Seven nearly identical complaints in seven months. And almost none of them ever saw the inside of a courtroom before the plaintiff himself pulled the plug. That’s the résumé a federal judge in Los Angeles was staring at when he decided one man had officially worn out his welcome in the Central District of California. If you’ve done any privacy defense work in California, you already know the lawsuit at the center of all this by heart, even before reading
Publishing over time
Last 90 days. Choose a month to open its work.
Recurring subjects
Named in the text we hold. One piece can cover several.
Audience
Top 1M sites
For natlawreview.com, the outlet · Measured Aug 1, 2026
Website popularity band, not a count of readers or article views.
About this data
Counts cover the work we have indexed. Tone needs enough text and a confident classification. Excerpts and episode notes are not full articles or transcripts.
Identity or attribution wrong? Suggest a correction.