Biometric Privacy Suits Don't Need Actual Harm, Ill. Court Told

Law360 (July 9, 2018, 9:40 PM EDT) -- Several privacy groups are urging the Illinois Supreme Court to strike down a ruling that plaintiffs must claim some actual harm to be considered an "aggrieved person" under the state's Biometric Information Privacy Act, arguing that the holding undermines the statute’s purpose and effectiveness.

The closely watched dispute over the scope of Illinois' biometric privacy law landed before the state high court in May, after Stacy Rosenbach successfully petitioned for leave to appeal a state appellate court's Dec. 21 decision that plaintiffs must claim some actual harm in order to meet the statutory definition of an "aggrieved" person who is allowed to...

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.


  • Access to case data within articles (numbers, filings, courts, nature of suit, and more.)
  • Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
  • Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics and so much more!

TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Beta
Ask a question!