Privacy Class Actions
At Phillips, Erlewine, Given & Carlin we know that despite the ever-expanding reach and commodification of personal data by tech companies and other large corporations, the right to privacy is fundamental in California. For over ten years, our privacy class action attorneys have been dedicated to protecting the rights of individuals whose privacy has been compromised online or unwittingly through the apps on their phone.
Our Approach
With the increasing prevalence of data breaches, improper handling of personal information, and other tech-based violations of privacy rights, individuals must band together to protect their personal information and be fairly compensated when that information is leaked without their permission. Our team of seasoned attorneys have a wealth of experience and success in privacy class action lawsuits.
Our firm’s successes include:
TikTok, Inc. Consumer Privacy Litigation: $92,000,000
Privacy Class Action Against Leading Technology Companies: $5,300,000
Our approach to privacy class action representation is centered around three core principles:
1. Experience
We have a deep understanding of privacy laws and regulations, both in California and nationwide. Our privacy class action attorneys stay at the forefront of emerging privacy issues, ensuring they possess the up-to-date knowledge necessary to provide effective privacy class action representation.
Our Privacy Class Action Practice covers a broad range of privacy-related issues, including but not limited to:
Data breaches
Unauthorized sharing or selling of personal information
Privacy policy violations
Failure to obtain or honor consent for data collection/use
Unauthorized use of facial recognition technology to track and identify people
Unauthorized online tracking and behavioral advertising
Workplace privacy breaches
Intrusion upon seclusion
Invasion of privacy through technology
Right of publicity claims
2. Comprehensive Representation
We believe in holistic legal representation. We handle all aspects of privacy class action litigation, including case evaluations, investigation, negotiation, settlement, every step of litigation in court, and appeals if necessary. Our goal is to secure the best possible compensation for affected individuals and hold accountable those who have violated privacy rights.
3. Client-Centered Approach
We place our clients at the heart of everything we do. We understand that having your privacy violated can be traumatic: it can create financial, emotional, and reputational harm. No one should have to tolerate a company unlawfully acquiring or disclosing their personal contact information without their permission. Our privacy class action lawyers are dedicated to providing personalized attention and support to every client, ensuring their voices are heard and their rights are protected.
Why Choose Us?
When it comes to privacy class action litigation, choosing the right legal representation is the most important initial step to vindicating your rights. Here are a few reasons to consider our firm:
Experience: Our attorneys have a successful track record. We’ve successfully litigated privacy class action lawsuits, achieving substantial settlements for our clients.
Dedication: As a firm, we are deeply committed to fighting for our clients' privacy rights.
Resources: Our firm possesses the necessary resources to access, gather, and analyze the extensive evidence required to build a strong case.
Collaboration: We believe in the power of collaboration and work closely with our clients and sometimes other firms to give our class action privacy clients the best possible representation. We practice and preach open communication with our clients and actively involve our clients in the decision-making process.
If you believe your privacy has been violated, contact us to discuss your next steps with one of our privacy class action attorneys.
Contact Us
The class action suit is currently pending in the Southern District of California before Judge Scarsi.
O'Malley and Erlewine discussed their recent success representing California workers in Raines v. US Healthworks.
Senior Counsel Mike Levinson’s article Incivility may cost you was published in the January 2024 issue of Plaintiff Magazine. The article summarizes and analyzes the recent California court of appeals decision Snoek v. ExakTime Innovations, Inc.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Colin P. Leis rejected Deloitte’s attempt to dismiss whistleblower retaliation claims brought against both the consulting giant and UCLA by firm client Omar Noorzai, the former Executive Director of UCLA’s Business Transformation Office.
The California Supreme Court featured Raines v. US Healthworks as one of four high profile cases in their “Year in Review” article.
Law360 named the firm one of its “legal lions” of the week for their work on behalf of employees in Raines v. US Healthworks (Case No. S273630).
The California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Raines v. US Healthworks (Case No. S273630), holding that an employer’s business entity agents can be held directly liable under the FEHA for employment discrimination.”
Firm partner Randy Erlewine argued before the California Supreme Court on behalf of clients Kristina Raines, Derrick Figg, and a putative class of over 500,000 aggrieved California job applicants who were subjected to discriminatory and invasive medical screenings.
Popular newspaper, SF Gate, and food news magazine, Eater San Francisco, reported on the firm’s October 2022 wage theft class action settlement on behalf of hourly employees who worked at local restaurant Bobo’s Steakhouse and former establishment Bobo’s Burger Bar.
Firm lawyers Nick Carlin, Brian Conlon, and Kyle O’Malley filed a response on behalf of plaintiff Anthony Gantner and California utility customers to PG&E’s amici curiae in the California Supreme Court.
Firm lawyers Nicholas Carlin, Brian Conlon, and Kyle O’Malley today filed a reply brief on behalf of plaintiff Anthony Gantner and California utility customers in the California Supreme Court.
Randy Erlewine, Brian Conlon, and Kyle O’Malley filed a Reply Brief on behalf of workers in the California Supreme Court in Raines v. U.S. Healthworks.
The agreement settles multidistrict litigation on behalf of a nationwide class of 89 million app users who alleged TikTok surreptitiously harvested and profited from private user information in violation of numerous federal and state consumer privacy laws.
The California Supreme Court today voted 6-0 (with Justice Kruger abstaining) to accept the firm’s case (Gantner v. PG&E) for review.
Firm attorneys Randy Erlewine, Brian Conlon, and Kyle O’Malley filed plaintiffs’ opening brief in the California Supreme Court on behalf of clients Kristina Raines and Darrick Figg and a class of more than 500,000 California job applicants.
The Court will resolve the important question of whether a corporate agent acting on behalf of an employer can be independently liable for its violation of California’s discrimination laws (the Fair Employment and Housing Act – “FEHA”).
A Ninth Circuit panel certified a novel question of California law in the firm’s class action against U.S. Healthworks and Concentra to the California Supreme Court.
A Ninth Circuit panel today certified two novel questions of California law in the firm’s negligence class action against PG&E to the California Supreme Court.
Firm lawyers Randy Erlewine, Kyle O’Malley, and Leah Romm today filed a reply to defendants’ answering brief in the Ninth Circuit, further contesting the district court’s dismissal of the firm’s clients’ class action complaint against the nation’s largest pre-employment medical screening provider.
Federal district court judge John Z. Lee today gave preliminary approval to a settlement agreement reached in a wide-ranging privacy class action against the companies responsible for the wildly-popular TikTok app.
Firm lawyers Randy Erlewine and Kyle O’Malley last week filed an opening appellate brief contesting a San Diego federal district court’s dismissal of their clients’ complaint against U.S. Healthworks.
Firm partner Randy Erlewine finished his representation today of a class of hourly workers, obtaining final approval of a $3.1 million settlement.
Contra Costa County Superior Court Judge granted final approval of a class action settlement reached by the firm on behalf of approximately 160 former workers of Winter Honda and Winter Chevrolet.
United States District Court judge Lucy H. Koh today appointed firm partner David Given to lead the prosecution of a wide-ranging data privacy class action against app maker TikTok and two of its related companies.
The firm today pushed back against a bankruptcy court’s decision to dismiss a class action complaint the firm filed on behalf of client Anthony Gantner and a putative class of impacted Californians against PG&E.
Firm attorneys David Given, Nick Carlin and Brian Conlon have joined a team of lawyers from two other law firms and have brought a class action against TikTok, Inc.
The First District agreed with the firm that Hanless’ arbitration agreement was limited to only the defendant identified in the agreement and did not apply to claims against the individual owners of that car dealership or the other 12 dealership defendants.
The firm has filed a class action complaint against PG&E on behalf of firm client Anthony Gantner and a proposed class of PG&E customers.
The firm today filed a class action complaint in San Francisco federal court for age discrimination against Barnes & Noble, one of the nation’s largest booksellers.