Felland Ltd. Partnership v. Digi-Tel Communications, LLC, 384 Md. 520

Summary

The Maryland Court of Appeals held that an employee's unauthorized creation and dissemination of unsolicited commercial facsimile advertisements were outside the scope of his employment. Accordingly, the employer was not liable under respondeat superior for alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The court also reaffirmed that Maryland trial courts have jurisdiction over private damages actions under the Act and affirmed summary judgment for the employer.

Holdings

1. Maryland trial courts have jurisdiction to entertain private causes of action for damages under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3).
2. Taylor's creation and dissemination of unsolicited commercial facsimile advertisements were outside the scope of his employment with Digi-Tel; therefore, Digi-Tel could not be held liable under respondeat superior for those acts.
3. The record did not create a genuine dispute of material fact concerning whether Taylor acted within the scope of employment, and summary judgment for Digi-Tel was proper.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Maryland trial courts have jurisdiction to entertain a private action for damages under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3) of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
2. Whether Taylor's creation and dissemination of unsolicited commercial facsimile advertisements occurred within the scope of his employment with Digi-Tel so as to impose respondeat superior liability.
3. Whether the evidence created a genuine dispute of material fact concerning whether Taylor's conduct was within the scope of his employment.

Disposition

affirmed