Say My Name: SelectQuote Scores Big Win—For Now
Companies are often sued not because they made the calls, but because someone else did. And when that “someone” is a third-party lead generator, plaintiffs need more than speculation to tie the defendant to the phone call. That was the key issue in Lightfoot v. SelectQuote, Inc., No. 1:24-cv-04673, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103026 (N.D. Ill. May 30, 2025), where SelectQuote secured a win at the motion to dismiss stage by showing the call in question didn’t mention them at all.
Ronald Lightfoot sued SelectQuote under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), alleging he received a prerecorded message promoting insurance products. But the message didn’t include SelectQuote’s name or any identifying details. It was a generic pitch from “Ashley, your health center representative,” mentioning Medicare benefits and possible cashback—no mention of any information that would link SelectQuote to the call.
Despite this, Lightfoot argued that SelectQuote should be held vicariously liable because it hired third-party lead generators who placed such calls and paid them per transfer. But the judge wasn’t buying it. To hold a company liable for a third party’s call, the plaintiff must plausibly connect the call to the defendant. Undermining his argument, Lightfoot admitted SelectQuote’s name was intentionally omitted from the call script.
The court found no factual allegations linking the call directly to SelectQuote. Simply put, you can’t sue a company just because you suspect they benefited from someone else’s telemarketing. The complaint lacked the specifics necessary to move forward and was dismissed without prejudice.
This lawsuit fits a growing pattern in TCPA litigation: targeting big-name companies with the deepest pockets even if they didn’t place the calls themselves. But courts aren’t accepting those claims without evidence. If the name isn’t on the call, plaintiffs better have something more to offer.
Still, this isn’t the end of the road. The court granted Lightfoot leave to amend his complaint, which is common at this stage. With limited discovery granted, he’ll get another shot to allege facts that connect SelectQuote to the call. Whether that attempt will stick is another question entirely.