Monday, February 1, 2016

8th Circuit Refuses to Toss Target Data Breach Class Action Settlement

targetAn objection to the $10 million settlement deal in the class action lawsuit alleging Target’s negligence in security measures caused a massive data breach in 2013 was dismissed by the 8th Circuit on appeal last week.

The Target class action lawsuit allegations arise from a 2013 data breach Target disclosed during the busy holiday season. Over 33 lawsuits were consolidated in federal court in Minnesota.

According to the plaintiffs, 70 million customers had their personal information compromised during the breach, including their names, addresses, phone numbers, and email addresses. An estimated 40 million customers may have also had their credit or debit card numbers stolen as well.

In November of this year, a $10 million settlement agreement was granted final approval by a Minnesota federal judge. In granting final approval, the judge stated, “Further litigation in this case would undoubtedly be expensive and complex. The legal issues involved are cutting-edge and unsettled, so that many resources would necessarily be spent litigating substantive law as well as other issues. The early settlement of this case benefits the plaintiff class immensely, and this factor weighs heavily in favor of the settlement.”

According to court documents the settlement agreement includes “All persons in the United States whose credit or debit card information and/or whose personal information was compromised as a result of the date breach that was first disclosed by Target on December 9, 2013.”

Target provided direct notice to 61 million people about the settlement, which will allows eligible Class Members who can document their loss up to $10,000 to receive compensation and consumers without documentation eligible to split the remainder of the settlement fund.

There were 11 objections to the Target class action settlement. Target filed a motion to require the objectors to post bond for the costs of the appeal. Target pointed out that one of the objectors was not even a Class Member because he used a Target payment card after the Class period and therefore shouldn’t be entitled to appeal the settlement.

Representatives for the Class agreed stating “A non-member of a class lacks standing to object to a class action settlement.” A three-judge panel dismissed that objection to the Target settlement citing the court’s procedure for dismissing an appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Another objector argued that the $6.75 million in attorneys’ fees were excessive and unreasonable. The objector also claimed that Target’s promise to increase security measures would not benefit Class Members. These objections were dismissed by a Minnesota federal judge who pointed out that the attorneys’ fees came out of a fund separate from the $10 million. The judge also found that the fees were reasonable in relation to the expenses of providing notice and administering the settlement.

The consumers are represented by Heins Mills & OLson PLC, Nichols Kaster PLLP, Morgan & Morgan Complex Litigation Group PA, Girard Gibbs LLP, Milberg LLP, Chestnut Cambronne PA and Steuve Siegel Hanson LLP, among others.

The Target Data Breach Class Action Lawsuit MDL is In re: Target Corp. Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, Case No. 0:14-md-02522, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota.

We tell you about cash you can claim EVERY WEEK! Sign up for our free newsletter.

  • Email*
  • State*
    selectAlabamaAlaskaArizonaArkansasCaliforniaColoradoConnecticutDelawareDistrict of ColumbiaFloridaGeorgiaHawaiiIdahoIllinoisIndianaIowaKansasKentuckyLouisianaMaineMarylandMassachusettsMichiganMinnesotaMississippiMissouriMontanaNebraskaNevadaNew HampshireNew JerseyNew MexicoNew YorkNorth CarolinaNorth DakotaOhioOklahomaOregonPennsylvaniaRhode IslandSouth CarolinaSouth DakotaTennesseeTexasUtahVermontVirginiaWashingtonWest VirginiaWisconsinWyomingArmed Forces AmericasArmed Forces EuropeArmed Forces Pacific


jQuery(document).ready(function($){gformInitSpinner( 5, ‘http://11284-presscdn-0-40.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/plugins/gravityforms/images/spinner.gif’ );jQuery(‘#gform_ajax_frame_5’).load( function(){var contents = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘*’).html();var is_postback = contents.indexOf(‘GF_AJAX_POSTBACK’) >= 0;if(!is_postback){return;}var form_content = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘#gform_wrapper_5’);var is_confirmation = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘#gform_confirmation_wrapper_5’).length > 0;var is_redirect = contents.indexOf(‘gformRedirect(){‘) >= 0;var is_form = form_content.length > 0 && ! is_redirect && ! is_confirmation;if(is_form){jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_5’).html(form_content.html());setTimeout( function() { /* delay the scroll by 50 milliseconds to fix a bug in chrome */ jQuery(document).scrollTop(jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_5’).offset().top); }, 50 );if(window[‘gformInitDatepicker’]) {gformInitDatepicker();}if(window[‘gformInitPriceFields’]) {gformInitPriceFields();}var current_page = jQuery(‘#gform_source_page_number_5’).val();gformInitSpinner( 5, ‘http://11284-presscdn-0-40.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/plugins/gravityforms/images/spinner.gif’ );jQuery(document).trigger(‘gform_page_loaded’, [5, current_page]);window[‘gf_submitting_5’] = false;}else if(!is_redirect){var confirmation_content = jQuery(this).contents().find(‘#gforms_confirmation_message_5’).html();if(!confirmation_content){confirmation_content = contents;}setTimeout(function(){jQuery(‘#gform_wrapper_5’).replaceWith(” + confirmation_content + ”);jQuery(document).scrollTop(jQuery(‘#gforms_confirmation_message_5’).offset().top);jQuery(document).trigger(‘gform_confirmation_loaded’, [5]);window[‘gf_submitting_5’] = false;}, 50);}else{jQuery(‘#gform_5’).append(contents);if(window[‘gformRedirect’]) {gformRedirect();}}jQuery(document).trigger(‘gform_post_render’, [5, current_page]);} );} ); if(typeof gf_global == ‘undefined’) var gf_global = {“gf_currency_config”:{“name”:”U.S. Dollar”,”symbol_left”:”$”,”symbol_right”:””,”symbol_padding”:””,”thousand_separator”:”,”,”decimal_separator”:”.”,”decimals”:2},”base_url”:”http:\/\/topclassactions.com\/wp-content\/plugins\/gravityforms”,”number_formats”:[],”spinnerUrl”:”http:\/\/topclassactions.com\/wp-content\/plugins\/gravityforms\/images\/spinner.gif”};jQuery(document).bind(‘gform_post_render’, function(event, formId, currentPage){if(formId == 5) {gformInitChosenFields(‘#input_5_2′,’No results matched’);} } );jQuery(document).bind(‘gform_post_conditional_logic’, function(event, formId, fields, isInit){gformInitChosenFields(‘#input_5_2′,’No results matched’);} ); jQuery(document).ready(function(){jQuery(document).trigger(‘gform_post_render’, [5, 1]) } );

The post 8th Circuit Refuses to Toss Target Data Breach Class Action Settlement appeared first on Top Class Actions.

from http://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/lawsuit-news/326961-8th-cir-refuses-toss-target-data-breach-class-action-settlement/


No comments:

Post a Comment