Injunction entered against Minnesota caller
 

MINNEAPOLIS, Minn. – April 19, 2007 – A Minnesota federal court has entered an injunction against Ryan Swanberg, who had threatened real estate brokerages across the country, including some in Florida, with litigation for not complying with his request for their company “Do Not Call” policy within five days of the request. The injunction prohibits Swanberg from “citing or relying upon the do-not-call laws or regulations as grounds upon which to make demands, seek payment of money or the compromise of any claims whatsoever.”

Two things led to the injunction. First, because the amount of money Swanberg requested, a few thousand dollars, few brokers wanted to pay any court costs, which would be higher. But RE/MAX Ideal Properties Inc., an Oregon real estate brokerage, filed a lawsuit against the Swanberg in response to his threats.

Second, Swanberg failed to appear in court or file an answer in response to the lawsuit, leading the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota to enter an injunction against him. The court said that failure to issue an injunction could cause RE/MAX Ideal Properties to “suffer irreparable harm based on the Caller’s activities.”

In addition to the injunction, the court made the following declaratory judgments:

• RE/MAX Ideal Properties had not violated theTelephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and its supporting rules by not responding to Swanberg’s demands
• RE/MAX Ideal Properties did not have to respond to Swanberg’s demands
• Swanberg did not hold a private right of action pursuant to the TCPA
• Swanberg is not entitled to payment of money pursuant to the TCPA and its regulations 

Finally, the court permanently enjoined Swanberg against “citing or relying upon the TCPA or its regulations as grounds upon which to make demands, seek payment of money or the compromise of any claims whatsoever.” At face value, the injunction bars Swanberg from calling brokers anywhere in the U.S.; however, it applies directly only in Minnesota and Swanberg has the right to petition the court to change or modify its decision, so the situation could change. According to NAR, it’s not necessarily the end of Swanberg, but it is a powerful weapon in the arsenal to defend against him or shut him down.

In addition, the ruling applies only to Swanberg and not other callers; and the ruling does not dilute the nation’s existing do-not-call laws.

Swanberg employed the following method: First, he would contact fax a real estate brokerage and ask that his phone number be placed on the company’s internal “do not call” list. He would also request that the brokerage mail him a copy of the company’s policy for maintaining its internal “do not call” list within five days. If Swanberg did not receive the brokerage’s “do not call policy” within five days, he would threaten to file a lawsuit against the brokerage in Minnesota state court. However, he would offer the broker a chance to avoid the lawsuit by simply settling the matter for around $5,000.

To view the judgment in RE/MAX Ideal Properties Inc. v. Swanberg, No. 06-4843 (D. Minn. Mar. 6, 2007), go to: http://go-to.realtor.org/h/OR9II/L9IW4/YT/414FQ.
 

© 2007 FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®