Photo of Katie Sharpless

Here at CPW, we have covered many decisions addressing the need for Article III standing when pleading a claim in federal court. A recent rare decision out of a district court in the Ninth Circuit dismissed a data event litigation for lack of standing—showing the efficacy of a particular type of motion practice known

CPW previously has covered multiple decisions that address Article III standing requirements for pleading a claim in federal court. A recent decision out of a federal court in Missouri is an example of a Court finding that Plaintiff properly alleged facts to constitute standing in a data event litigation. Specifically, the Court analyzed the question

In a recent litigation and appeal involving claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the defendant, in a win for CRAs named in similar litigation.  Leoni v. Experian Info. Solutions, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 17687 (9th Cir. June 14. 2021).  

California stands apart from other states in that a right to privacy is specifically included in the state constitution.  As a result, data privacy litigations are frequently filed in California courts that not only assert various violations of California statutory law, but also violation of residents’ constitutional right to privacy.  However, not all of these

CPW has been covering data breach litigations, including instances in which meritless claims are kicked by courts at the pleading stage.  A recent decision from an Ohio district court is yet another example of this trend.  Newman v. Total Quality Logistics, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60651 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 30, 2021).  Read on

In Callahan v. Ancestry, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37811 (Mar. 1, 2021), Plaintiffs filed a complaint in a Northern California district court alleging that’s (“Ancestry’s”) use of Plaintiffs’ old yearbook photos and information in Ancestry’s Yearbook Database violated their privacy.  Plaintiffs sued Ancestry individually and on behalf of a putative California class claiming

CPW has previously covered the significance of arbitration clauses in the context of data privacy litigation.  While an arbitration agreement does not allow a defendant to avoid a lawsuit outright, it does provide an escape mechanism from public scrutiny and the costs associated with litigation. Whether an arbitration agreement applies to a dispute is a

As readers of CPW know, the Lavarious Gardiner v. Walmart Inc. et al. case is unusual.  Back in July 2020, Plaintiff filed a class action complaint against Walmart alleging that Walmart suffered a data breach which was never disclosed.  As evidence of the breach, Plaintiff presented claims that the personal information associated with his

CPW has previously covered how companies are increasingly turning to consumer arbitration agreements to limit litigation exposure.  While an arbitration agreement does not allow a defendant to avoid a lawsuit outright, it does provide an escape mechanism from the public scrutiny and cost of litigation.  Issues concerning application of arbitration agreements continue to come up