Court Denies DemandScience Motion to Dismiss Lawsuit
A federal judge rejects a dismissal bid in a class action over alleged unauthorized Colorado phone directory listings.
Updated on Oct. 25, 2026 in Law
Live Poll
Should digital platforms be required to obtain explicit consent before publishing personal cellphone numbers?
On August 17, 2026, a federal court denied a motion by DemandScience to dismiss a class action lawsuit filed under Colorado law. The litigation centers on allegations that the company published a directory of Colorado cellphone numbers without obtaining resident consent.
Why it matters
The ruling affirms that Colorado privacy statutes protect residents regardless of whether an entity is specifically engaged in telemarketing. This decision provides a legal framework for addressing data privacy concerns related to the unauthorized publication of personal contact information.
The federal court ruling spans 26 pages and evaluates the constitutionality and scope of Colorado Revised Statute Section 304(4)(a)(I). It remains unknown whether DemandScience will face further legal sanctions as the class action proceedings continue.
The players
DemandScience
DemandScience is a data and intelligence company facing a class action lawsuit regarding its business practices.
Galli v. DemandScience US, LLC
This is the formal title of the class action lawsuit filed by plaintiffs under the Prevention of Telemarketing Fraud Act.
The details
The court found that DemandScience's disclosures constitute commercial speech and determined that the state statute is neither unconstitutionally vague nor restricted by First Amendment concerns. By denying the motion to dismiss the amended complaint, the judge allowed the case, Galli v. DemandScience US, LLC, to proceed toward further litigation.
Timeline
August 17, 2026: The federal court issued the ruling denying the motion to dismiss.
Political Context
The court ruling interprets Colorado's Prevention of Telemarketing Fraud Act, confirming the law is not restricted to telemarketing entities. Opponents or corporate defense counsel may argue this interpretation creates a broad liability threshold for data publishers operating within the state.
This decision strengthens legal protections for Colorado residents who may have had their cellphone numbers published without permission. Residents can expect the litigation to continue as the court moves toward addressing the specific claims of unauthorized disclosure.
The takeaway
This ruling clarifies that consumer protection laws in Colorado apply broadly to commercial entities publishing personal data. Individuals should remain vigilant regarding their digital footprint and review the privacy policies of platforms that compile contact directories.
Further reading
For additional updates on state legislative developments, visit the Law section.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly.
Live Poll
Should digital platforms be required to obtain explicit consent before publishing personal cellphone numbers?
