Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
For as long as there have been data breaches that expose consumer data to hackers, there have been lawsuits by consumers seeking to hold companies liable for failing to protect the data collected by or entrusted to them. These lawsuits have often struggled to match up the unique realities of data breaches with traditional theories of legal liability, and courts have often dismissed data breach claims by consumers for reasons relating to lack of standing, unclear causation, nebulous harm, and speculative damages. This problem has been especially acute for plaintiffs hoping to bring claims on behalf of a class of all consumers whose personal data was compromised in a security breach.
A recent decision from the Southern District of Indiana, however, cut through these issues by allowing a class action claim to proceed on a theory of liability often proposed by commentators as a solution to the data breach liability conundrum but until recently almost uniformly rejected by courts: the common law theory of bailment. See, Krupa v. TIC International Corp., 2023 WL 143140 (S.D. Ind. Jan. 10, 2023). If other courts around the country follow Krupa's lead, it could represent a major shift in how data breach claims are litigated, and companies that maintain Personally Identifiable Information (PII) belonging to consumers or employees should be watching closely.
|The elements of a bailment action, and even the question of whether the claim sounds in contract or tort, vary from state-to-state. The underlying concept is a simple one, however; as the court in Krupa recognized, "[e]trusting your stuff to others is a bailment." Krupa, 2023 WL 143140, at *3. More formally, a bailment relationship is "created by the delivery of personal property by one person to another in trust for a specific purpose, pursuant to an express or implied contract to fulfill that trust." 8A Am. Jur. 2d Bailments §1 (2018). When one who holds property on behalf of another fails to take appropriate care to protect it and the property is "damaged, lost or stolen, the bailor may bring an action for recovery of damages from the bailee" based on that harm. 46 Am. Jur. Proof of Facts 3d 361.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The LJN Quarterly Update highlights some of the articles from the nine LJN Newsletters titles over the quarter. Articles include in-depth analysis and insights from lawyers and other practice area experts.
End of year collections are crucial for law firms because they allow them to maximize their revenue for the year, impacting profitability, partner distributions and bonus calculations by ensuring outstanding invoices are paid before the year closes, which is especially important for meeting financial targets and managing cash flow throughout the firm.
Law firms and companies in the professional services space must recognize that clients are conducting extensive online research before making contact. Prospective buyers are no longer waiting for meetings with partners or business development professionals to understand the firm's offerings. Instead, they are seeking out information on their own, and they want to do it quickly and efficiently.
Through a balanced approach that combines incentives with accountability, firms can navigate the complexities of returning to the office while maintaining productivity and morale.
The paradigm of legal administrative support within law firms has undergone a remarkable transformation over the last decade. But this begs the question: are the changes to administrative support successful, and do law firms feel they are sufficiently prepared to meet future business needs?