Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Recent Court Decisions Reverse Prior Plaintiff-Friendly BIPA Trends

By Daniel Saeedi & Richard Hu on May 15, 2020
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

Enacted in 2008, the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) continues to be the most consumer-friendly biometric privacy law in the country. In the wake of the Illinois Supreme Court’s seminal 2019 decision in Rosenbach v. Six Flags, plaintiffs have filed hundreds of class action lawsuits against businesses and employers in a broad range of industries, including manufacturing, logistics, retail, hospitality, food and beverage, health and technology. These lawsuits have been filed because of a perception that BIPA, as interpreted by the Illinois Supreme Court in Rosenbach, creates significant liability where biometric information has been collected from an employee or consumer without first providing notification and obtaining consent, even if no actual damages have been suffered.

In the spring of 2020, however, there have been a handful of court decisions that have bucked the previously plaintiff-friendly BIPA trends and perceptions.

To read the full Taft law bulletin on this topic, click here.

Photo of Daniel Saeedi Daniel Saeedi

Daniel focuses his practice on issues relating to employment law and unfair competition. He represents clients nationwide in the realm of trade secret theft, non-competition and non-solicitation agreements, and breaches of fiduciary duties.  In addition, he helps companies conduct complex internal investigations regarding…

Daniel focuses his practice on issues relating to employment law and unfair competition. He represents clients nationwide in the realm of trade secret theft, non-competition and non-solicitation agreements, and breaches of fiduciary duties.  In addition, he helps companies conduct complex internal investigations regarding intellectual property theft, computer fraud and data privacy issues.

Read more about Daniel SaeediEmail
Show more Show less
Photo of Richard Hu Richard Hu

Richard is a regulatory attorney and litigator who helps companies resolve complex gaming law, data privacy and healthcare issues affecting their businesses. His experience includes data privacy, commercial litigation, labor and employment litigation and compliance, regulatory compliance defense, healthcare regulatory litigation and compliance…

Richard is a regulatory attorney and litigator who helps companies resolve complex gaming law, data privacy and healthcare issues affecting their businesses. His experience includes data privacy, commercial litigation, labor and employment litigation and compliance, regulatory compliance defense, healthcare regulatory litigation and compliance, and medical cannabis licensing and compliance.

Read more about Richard HuEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Privacy and Cybersecurity
  • Blog:
    Taft Technology and Artificial Intelligence Insights
  • Organization:
    Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo