On August 22nd, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a major proposed class action case. This suit alleged that defendant insurance companies engaged in misconduct by leaking the plaintiffs’ driver’s license numbers. The court’s decision hinged on the premise that the plaintiffs didn’t have the standing necessary to sue the insurance companies in question.
The case sought to bring to account insurance companies under the framework of the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act (DPPA). A key element of the DPPA prohibits the unauthorized disclosure of certain personal information from State department of motor vehicles records. Unfortunately for the plaintiffs, the court split in its decision, with the majority opinion arguing that plaintiffs failed to meet the necessary conditions to establish standing for a lawsuit premised on the DPPA’s protections.
The dismissal of the proposed DPPA class action is not only significant for the plaintiffs and defendant insurance companies involved, but it also has broader implications. Legal professionals, especially those working with large corporations and law firms, may need to reassess their interpretation of “standing” and its cinematic role in clients’ ability to pursue certain legal actions, particularly those relying heavily on privacy protection legislations such as the DPPA.
Two salient issues arise from the court’s position. Firstly, the case highlights the importance of standing in the field of privacy law, showing that the burden of proof to establish standing can often be a high hurdle for plaintiffs to overcome. Secondly, the judgment should raise concerns for legal professionals defending similar privacy lawsuits and raise questions around the effectiveness of privacy laws if the victims of privacy violations are deemed to lack standing in court.
Read the full summary of this appeal case at JD Supra, provided by law firm Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP.