“Many predicted data breach class-action lawsuits would rise following the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit’s ruling in Remijas v. Neiman Marcus Group LLC, which stemmed from the 2013 theft of credit card and other personal information from the retailer. But so far, the floodgates have yet to fly open,” writes John J. Jablonski, Goldberg Segalla partner and Co-Chair of its Cyber Risk and Social Media Practice Group in an article for Claims Management magazine.
The piece examines how plaintiffs in federal class actions must show “injury-in-fact” to confer Article III standing and why the Seventh Circuit’s ruling in the Neiman Marcus data breach class action has hardly brought about the feeding frenzy many predicted. John looks at a handful of important data breach cases from 2015 that cite Neiman Marcus and examines how the plaintiffs in each attempted to demonstrate injury-in-fact — with mixed results.
“Standing may be easier for class-action plaintiffs to demonstrate if their data was hacked, but as these cases demonstrate, surviving a standing motion is not always as easy as commentators predicted it would be in the wake of Neiman Marcus,” he writes.
“Neiman Marcus Fallout: Standing in Data Breach Class Actions,” Claims Management, December 17, 2015