Classified Class Action Blog

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe

Privacy & Technology Class Action Articles

The latest class action developments and trends in the privacy and technology industry, including news, key cases, and strategies.

MDL Litigation: Class and Complex Cases to Watch in 2018

December 22, 2017 by Carlton Fields

The Judicial Panel for Multidistrict Litigation (“MDL Panel” or “Panel”) has transferred 97 putative class actions relating to the Equifax data breach to the Northern District of Georgia, where Equifax is headquartered. Judge Thomas Thrash, who previously handled the consolidated class actions relating to the Home Depot data breach, will preside over the actions. Eighty-five of the plaintiffs and Equifax supported this result, while the remaining plaintiffs proposed ... Keep Reading »

Fall Data Breach Roundup and 2018 Preview: Supreme Court, OPM, Equifax and More!

November 21, 2017 by Carlton Fields

As 2017 draws to a close, data breach class actions abound, while questions regarding what suffices for Article III standing in these cases remain—with litigants hoping the Supreme Court will soon weigh in. Earlier this year, as previously reported, the D.C. Circuit decided Attias v. CareFirst, No. 16-7108 (Aug. 1, 2017), a putative class action filed after the health insurance company suffered a data breach that affected more than one million records. After the D.C. ... Keep Reading »

Ninth Circuit Snubs Stolt-Nielsen, Holds Generic Employee Arbitration Agreement Permits Class-wide Arbitration

November 7, 2017 by Carlton Fields

After an employer allegedly released personally identifiable information of its employees as the result of a phishing scam, plaintiff employee filed a putative class action lawsuit, alleging claims including negligence, breach of contract, invasion of privacy, and other claims. The employer moved to compel bilateral arbitration pursuant to the arbitration agreement plaintiff signed in connection with his employment. The district court found that the arbitration agreement ... Keep Reading »

The Continuing Saga of Standing in Data Breach Class Actions: The 8th Circuit Weighs In

September 28, 2017 by Carlton Fields

We previously reported on the developing circuit split over Article III standing in data breach class action cases. In August, the D.C. Circuit Court joined the Sixth, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits in finding that the injury-in-fact requirement for Article III standing can be satisfied by fear of identity theft following a data breach. Now, the Eighth Circuit has weighed in with two new decisions that evidence a narrower, more nuanced approach to the standing issue. In ... Keep Reading »

Still Standing: Ninth Circuit Again Finds Standing in Spokeo Remand

August 30, 2017 by Carlton Fields

The Ninth Circuit recently issued its latest opinion in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, the closely-watched putative class action dating back to 2010. The plaintiff initiated the lawsuit against Spokeo, which aggregates publicly available data about individuals on its website, alleging the company published inaccurate information about him, including his age, wealth, marital status, educational history, and profession. He claimed that this conduct violated the Fair Credit ... Keep Reading »

Kansas Judge Rejects Discovery From Putative Class Members

August 24, 2017 by Gary M. Pappas and Ricardo Rozen

A magistrate judge in Kansas denied the defendant’s request to conduct discovery of putative class members via a voluntary questionnaire. Plaintiff Hapka filed a class action against home health care provider CareCentrix stemming from a 2016 data breach of employees’ personal information, including wage and tax statements. Plaintiff alleged a fraudulent tax return was filed in her name following the cyberattack and that she continued to be at a heightened risk for tax ... Keep Reading »

Are DC Federal Courts the Next Hotbed for Data Breach Class Actions?

August 4, 2017 by Carlton Fields

We have previously reported on the evolving circuit split over standing in data breach class actions. On August 1st, a three judge panel for the District of Columbia Circuit became the latest to weigh in on the issue. In Attias v. CareFirst, the DC Circuit panel joined the Sixth, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits in finding that fear of future identity theft in the wake of a data breach satisfied the injury in fact requirement for standing under Article III of the United ... Keep Reading »

Class Action and Regulatory Settlements Reflect the Rising Cost of Data Breaches

July 11, 2017 by Carlton Fields

As the number of data breaches continues to increase, so too do the costs. After a breach occurs, companies typically expend significant sums conducting investigations, notifying customers and regulators, and engaging in public relations. They incur additional expenses enhancing security and providing identity protection services to victims. And then, of course, there are legal fees, involving both litigation and compliance, which can add up to more than half the total ... Keep Reading »

Lease-Termination Fee Class Fails Third Circuit Ascertainability Requirement

June 1, 2017 by David L. Luck and Gary M. Pappas

Using the Third Circuit’s comparatively robust ascertainability standard, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania recently denied certification of a class of tenants allegedly charged an improper lease-termination fee and subjected to collections calls in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq. In its order, the district court explained that under the Third Circuit’s ascertainability precedent, ... Keep Reading »

Lone Objector’s Class-Conflict Arguments Miss the Target

May 31, 2017 by Ricardo Rozen and Gary M. Pappas

In 2015, Target settled a class action stemming from a massive data breach of its customers’ sensitive information. According to the settlement terms, Target agreed to pay $10 million to those affected. The Minnesota district court originally granted approval over the class and the settlement. However a lone objector filed an appeal, and the Eighth Circuit granted a limited remand because it was not satisfied the district court had conducted a “rigorous analysis” of the ... Keep Reading »

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • …
  • 8
  • Next Page »

Get Weekly Updates!

2020 Class Action Survey – Now Available!

DOWNLOAD NOW
Carlton Fields Logo A blog focused on the latest class action developments and trends by the attorneys of Carlton Fields.

Search

Topics

Industries/Practices
  • Construction
  • Consumer Finance & Banking
  • Food & Beverage
  • Health Care
  • Insurance
  • Labor, Employment & ERISA
  • Manufacturing & Products
  • Pharmaceutical
  • Privacy & Technology
  • Securities
  • Telecommunications

Substantive/Procedural
  • Arbitration
  • CAFA
  • Certification
    • Adequacy
    • Ascertainability
    • Commonality
    • Numerosity
    • Predominance
    • Superiority
    • Typicality
  • Decertification
  • Settlements
  • Standing
  • Striking of Class Allegations

Courts/Jurisdiction
  • Federal District Courts
  • Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal
  • United States Supreme Court
  • State Courts

Monthly Archives

Recent Articles

  • MDL Court Denies Class Certification of Proposed “NAS Babies” Class
  • What’s Good for Trial Is Good for Class Certification: Fifth Circuit Rules That Daubert Applies at Class Certification Stage
  • One Game, One Stadium: Eleventh Circuit Spikes Collateral Challenge to Tampa Bay Buccaneers Proposed Class Action Settlement

Get Weekly Updates!

Carlton Fields

  • carltonfields.com
  • Practices
  • Industries
  • Class Action Survey

Related Industries/Practices

  • National Class Actions
  • National Trial Practice
  • Appellate & Trial Support
  • Our Class Action Experience

Classified: The Class Action Blog

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact

Classified Logo
© 2014–2021 Carlton Fields, P.A. · Carlton Fields practices law in California as Carlton Fields, LLP · All Rights Reserved · Privacy Policy · Disclaimer

Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please contact us. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites. This site may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions.