The Ninth Circuit will likely uphold an award of $13 million against Google over data collected by Street View cars, while a federal judge ruled Thursday that cellphone users can pursue privacy claims related to location tracking through mobile apps.
This Jan. 3, 2013, file photo shows Google’s headquarters in Mountain View, Calif. (AP Photo/Marcio Jose Sanchez)
SAN FRANCISCO (CN) A Ninth Circuit panel signaled a strong reluctance to overturn a settlement that pays no direct money to Google users whose private data was swiped by Google’s Street View cars.
Nearly 10 years in the making, the $13 million settlement U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer approved last March gives $9 million to privacy rights groups, and forced Google to stop harvesting data through street-view vehicles.
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
Takeaway: As Judge Diane Wood of the Seventh Circuit recently observed in a putative class action alleging violations of Illinois’s Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA), “allegations matter” and “a plaintiff is the master of her own complaint.”
Thornley v. Clearview AI, Inc., - F.3d. -, No. 20-3249, 2021 WL 128170, at 4- 5 (7th Cir. Jan. 14, 2021). There is nothing wrong with putative class plaintiffs advancing allegations devoid of Article III injury “to steer clear of federal court.”
Id. at 6. As demonstrated by the Seventh Circuit cases discussed in
Thornley, BIPA creates an opportunity for such a strategic choice, given that it provides a right of action for certain violations that give rise to an Article III injury-in-fact, as well as certain violations that do not – namely, specific BIPA violations that are nothing more than “bare procedural violation[s], divorced from any co
Leiff Cabraser s Richard Heimann filed the appeal
BOSTON (Legal Newsline) – Class action lawyers who were found to have misled a judge in a $300 million lawsuit are appealing the order that slashed their cut.
Class counsel Lieff Cabraser filed its appeal Jan. 26 in Boston federal court of at least three adverse rulings in the long-running State Street securities class action. The settlement seemed simple - $300 million for the class, with 25% going to their lawyers – but drew scrutiny after media coverage from the
Boston Globe.
Last year, Judge Mark Wolf issued a 159-page order that cut lawyer fees from $75 million to $60 million.
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience. Necessary
PITTSBURGH – A federal judge has denied a motion to remand a class action lawsuit to state court, one brought by a Pittsburgh man who alleged Walmart unlawfully overcharges its customers taxes on the sale of dietary products.
Christopher Lisowski of Pittsburgh (on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated) first filed suit in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas on Oct. 7 versus Walmart Stores, Inc., of Bentonville, Ark.
“On Dec. 29, 2019 plaintiff Lisowski purchased a six-pack of “5-Hour Energy” brand dietary supplement at the Walmart store located at 877 Freeport Road, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Plaintiff Lisowski’s receipt sets forth a purchase price of $13.48 and description of the dietary supplement purchased by plaintiff Lisowski. He was charged sales tax of $0.94 on the sale,” the suit stated.