The Seventh Circuit recently affirmed entry of summary judgment against a TCPA plaintiff and adopted the Eastern District of Wisconsin’s interpretation of the phrase “telephone solicitations.” Hulce v. Zipongo, Inc., — F. 4th —, 2025 WL 829603 (7th Cir. 2025). The Seventh Circuit held that “a ‘telephone solicitation’ requires that the call or message be initiated with the purpose of persuading or urging someone to pay for property, goods, or services.” The Hulce plaintiff could not meet this standard because the services at issue were offered to him free of charge. The decision solidifies an interpretation of “telephone solicitation” that has emerged in various district courts over the past few years.
James Hulce, a Wisconsin resident who received his health care through Medicaid, opted to enroll in Chorus Community Healthcare Plans (CCHP). CCHP, in turn, contracted with Defendant Zipongo, Inc. (d/b/a Foodsmart) to advertise nutritional consultations to its members. The consultations were offered to members at no cost. Hulce alleged that he received approximately twenty calls and text messages from Foodsmart despite his registration on the national do-not-call list and his requests for further communications to cease.