During these challenging times, Severson & Werson remains open and in full operation, consistent with the firm’s previously established contingency planning. While many of our attorneys and staff will be working remotely, as a firm, we continue in full operation. We are here to help, as always.

Art. III Standing

Subscribe to Consumer Finance

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Consumer Finance Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

In Stasi v. Inmediata Health Grp. Corp., No. 19cv2353 JM (LL), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 217097 (S.D. Cal. Nov. 19, 2020), Judge Miller allowed a data security breach class action to proceed.  The basis of the class action was as follows: According to Plaintiffs' FAC,1 Inmediata provides billing and health record software and service solutions to healthcare providers. (FAC ¶¶… Read More

In Foster v. Health Recovery Servs., No. 2:19-CV-4453, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 186508 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 7, 2020), Judge Marbley found that at least one claim of damages for a data breach victim satisfied Art. III standing. In a recent data breach case brought pursuant to the FCRA, the [*14]  Third Circuit examined both the congressional judgment and common law factors… Read More

In Jantzer v. Elizabethtown Cmty. Hosp., No. 8:19-cv-00791 (BKS/DJS), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83207 (N.D.N.Y. May 12, 2020), Judge Sannes dismissed a data breach class action for lack of standing.  The facts were as follows: UVM Health is Vermont Corporation headquartered in Burlington, Vermont that consists of a "six-hospital and home health & hospice system" located in "Vermont and northern… Read More

In Stasi v. Inmediata Health Grp. Corp., No. 19cv2353 JM (LL), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79303, at *1-4 (S.D. Cal. May 5, 2020), Judge Miller dismissed a nationwide identity theft/data breach class action. The facts were as follows: Plaintiffs allege that in January of 2019, Inmediata learned it was experiencing a large "data security incident" resulting in the exposure of… Read More

In Holly v. Alta Newport Hosp., Inc., No. 2:19-cv-07496-ODW (MRWx), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64104, at *1-3 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 10, 2020), Judge Wright held that a data breach victim, on behalf of a putative class, did not plead enough.    The facts were as follows: On October [*2]  18, 2019, Plaintiff Sallie Holly filed her First Amended Complaint ("FAC"). (FAC,… Read More

In Campbell v. Facebook, Inc., __ F.3d __, 2020 WL 1023350, The Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit held that violations of the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2510, et seq. (ECPA) and the California Invasion of Privacy Act, Cal. Pen. Code § 630, et seq. (CIPA) are, in and of themselves sufficient, without further allegations… Read More

In Adkins v. Facebook, Inc., No. C 18-05982-WHA, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 206271 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 26, 2019), Judge Alsup granted in part and denied in part a data breach class. This is a putative class action by plaintiff Stephen Adkins against defendant Facebook, Inc. Plaintiff asserts a claim for negligence based on Facebook's alleged faulty security practices in collecting… Read More

In Steven v. Carlos Lopez & Assocs., No. 18-CV-6500 (JMF), 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 203621 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 22, 2019), Judge Furman declined to  approve settlement of a data breach class due to the absence of Art. III standing. In June 2018, an employee of Defendant Carlos Lopez & Associates, LLC ("CLA"), a provider of mental and behavioral health services to… Read More

In In re Facebook, Inc., No. MDL No. 2843, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153505 (N.D. Cal. Sep. 9, 2019), Judge Chhabria allowed some claims to proceed against Facebook arising out of the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Facebook's motion to dismiss is littered with assumptions about the degree to which social media users can reasonably expect their personal information and communications to… Read More

1 2