JONES DAY PRESENTS®: Insurance Implications of the California Consumer Privacy Act
On June 23, 2025, Nip & Tuck Plastic Surgery, LLC (“Defendant”) was sued in the Northern District of Georgia for allegedly violating the Do Not Call (“DNC”) provisions of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”). DNC...more
Following in the wake of last years’ Loper Bright and Relentless, Inc. decisions that ended agency deference, the Supreme Court ruled on Friday in McLaughlin Chiropractic Assoc., Inc. v. McKesson Corp. that the Hobbs Act...more
On June 10, 2025, Judge Georgia N. Alexakis of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois issued an order allowing the defendant in an Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) action to immediately...more
On June 9, 2025, Tradercodes, LLC (“Defendant”) was sued in the Northern District of Georgia for allegedly violating the Do Not Call (“DNC”) provisions of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”). The National DNC...more
The Telephone Consumer Protection Act is a federal statute that governs various telemarketing practices. Following the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Facebook v. Duguid (narrowing the interpretation autodialer), the...more
Earlier this year, United HealthCare Services, Inc. (“Defendant”) agreed to settle a class action robocall lawsuit for $2.5 million. In Samson v. United Healthcare Services, Inc, filed in the United States District Court for...more
Illinois’s Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) continues to drive a wave of privacy-related litigation across the United States, though a 2024 amendment to the act—the first since BIPA’s enactment in 2008—may slow the...more
On February 28, 2024, Motive Technologies Inc., formerly known as Keep Truckin (“Defendant”), was sued in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California for allegedly delivering prerecorded...more
The long-awaited amendment provides immediate relief to corporate defendants from business-destroying liability - On August 2, 2024, Senate Bill 2979 went into effect limiting available damages under Illinois’ Biometric...more
Last week, the Illinois Senate advanced the first significant BIPA amendment (SB 2979), passing it in the Senate by a vote of 46-13. The bill has broad Democratic support, and groups that have traditionally opposed BIPA have...more
Readers of our blog may recall a recent article in which we discussed two Florida class action lawsuits that significantly limited telemarketing companies’ exposure in cases alleging violations of the Florida Telephone...more
This post is part of a series of articles we are doing on 2023 data protection litigation trends. While the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) is most known for its onerous privacy compliance obligations, the law also...more
The last month has brought several noteworthy decisions helpful for defendants facing class actions brought under the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act (FTSA). Issues include the enforcement of arbitration agreements,...more
This post is part of a series of articles we are doing on 2023 data protection litigation trends. Since its enactment in 2008, Illinois’s Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) has produced a wave of privacy-related...more
Joining every other circuit to address the same issue, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently ruled that a consumer does not have to prove actual damages to recover statutory damages for willful...more
Statutes defining minimum damages per violation, such as many consumer protection laws, often inspire class actions. Plaintiffs argue that certification of such classes is easier because they avoid issues of individualized...more
After years out of circulation, class-action lawsuits asserting claims under the Video Protection Privacy Act (VPPA) are now back in reruns. But early critical assessment is mixed, so it remains to be seen whether VPPA-driven...more
Statutory schemes that create per-violation damage minimums can lead to devastating consequences when assessed in the aggregate. Where evidence of actual damages is lacking, judgments may be disproportionate to the harm and...more
For those embroiled in Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) class action litigation, the sum of the damages may not necessarily equal the whole. In Wakefield v. ViSalus, Inc., the plaintiff and certified...more
A few months ago, we previewed an imminent decision that would address, for the first time, a long-unsettled question for class actions brought under New York’s General Business Law (“GBL”): can a class of consumers obtain...more
Joint Juice, according to its labelling and advertising, promoted “healthy and happy,” if not pain free, joints. A jury apparently thought it was closer to snake oil, finding the product’s marketing false, misleading, and...more
New York’s two principal consumer fraud statutes, N.Y. G.B.L. §§ 349 and 350, authorize statutory damages of $50 or $500 per violation respectively...more
New York’s consumer protection laws are particularly attractive to the plaintiff’s bar. One reason is the availability of “statutory” damages under New York’s General Business Law (“GBL”). While most states’ consumer...more
On February 3, 2022, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that the exclusivity provisions of the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act (“IWCA”) do not bar a claim for statutory damages under the Illinois Biometric Information...more
The deluge of lawsuits brought under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA), 740 ILCS 14 et seq. over the past several years has presented a challenge to companies operating in Illinois. Not surprisingly,...more