Hi TCPAWorld!
So as some of you know I’m from Louisiana—specifically the 985 region. I love Taco Bell. So, it stings a little to see my home state dragging Taco Bell into federal court. And just to be clear, this is a (337) area code problem, not a (985) one.
A new class action was filed, Chautin v. Taco Bell Corp., 6:25CV01632, in the Western District of Louisiana for alleged violations of the TCPA’s National DNC provision.
The plaintiff alleges she received “at least twelve” marketing texts in July and August 2025, that she did not consent to after her number was on the list on June 19, 2025. She provides screen shots from three of the alleged text messages, which state: “Taco Bell: don’t sleep on earning free food. start earning points today to get 1 free item every 250 points. pull up, earn, redeem. it’s that simple fam. terms apply.”; “Taco Bell: tony hawk’s take on the luxe box is rad. quesadilla, taco, chips & cheese, med iced tea. this box shreds. Reply STOP to opt-out.”
The plaintiff further alleges that the texts “were intended for someone other than, and unknown to” her. So, this whole federal lawsuit might be because Taco Bell kept texting the wrong number, and that number just happened to be added on the on the DNC list earlier this year.
Based upon the text messages she received, the plaintiff is seeking to certify the following class:
“All persons throughout the United States (1) who did not provide their telephone number to Defendant (2) to whom Defendant delivered, or caused to be delivered, more than one voice message or text message within a 12-month period, promoting Defendant’s goods or services, (3) where the person’s residential or cellular telephone number had been registered with the National Do Not Call Registry for at least thirty days before Defendant delivered, or caused to be delivered, at least two of the voice messages or text messages within the 12 month period, (4) within four years preceding the date of this complaint and through the date of class certification.”
Now I can see this one being an extremely interesting case.
You have courts ruling unpredictably post-McLaughlin as to whether text messages are subject to the TCPA’s DNC provisions.
Then you have the opinion in Abboud v. Circle K Stores 2025 WL 2800052 (D. Az Sept. 30, 2025), which clarifies that an “existing business relationship” can exist from any voluntary purchase from a defendant: CERTIFICATION DENIED!: EBR Issues Prevent Certification of TCPA Suit Against Circle K (Exactly as I Said they Would – TCPAWorld
And in the complaint, plaintiff does not allege she was never a Taco Bell customer or purchased anything from Taco Bell within the last 18 months.
It’ll be interesting to see how this one plays out.
But this case also serves as an important reminder to constantly scrub your leads against the National DNC Registry and to run numbers against the RND!
