Target continues to mitigate massive data breach, faces countless lawsuits and litigation claims
An estimated 40 million credit cards and debit cards that were used between Nov. 27 and Dec. 15 were breached, though Target representatives confirmed earlier this week that all customers PIN numbers remain secure and safe.
December 30, 2013 at 06:01 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
With the importance of security surrounding the increase in shopping that supports the holiday season, a retailer's biggest fear is dealing with a cybersecurity threat during their most high traffic time of the year. So when Target announced a data breach, only days away from Christmas, the timing was anything but convenient for the retail giant and its customers.
An estimated 40 million credit cards and debit cards that were used between Nov. 27 and Dec. 15 were breached, though Target representatives confirmed earlier this week that all customer's PIN numbers remain secure and safe.
While customers became the first affected party on Target's mind after the breach was announced, the company's attention was quickly diverted to the subsequent banks of the customer's that they would have to answer to. Target is looking at million dollars in legal fees due to this mishap.
Nearly a week after Christmas, and two weeks after the breach was announced, customers are already noticing fraudulent charges on their accounts. Consumers affected by the breach are justified to sue the retailer if hackers rack up charges on their credit/debit cards that result in negative impacts on their credit. According to Biz Journal, banks and credit card companies can also take Target to court over the costs of having to issue new cards and dealing with fraudulent purchases, which has already become the case according to a number of news outlets.
While a stop to this fraudulent activity and the outcome of the breach in general is still unknown, one thing that is for certain, is that any Target customers who may have shopped at the retailer in the weeks leading up to Christmas should be taking immediate action to avoid fraudulent charges and potential negative implications against their credit. If you have yet to do so, contact your bank to alert them of potential fraud and request a new credit/debit card. Banks have been understanding of the massive breach, however, if your account has been compromised, you will still have to wait 2-4 weeks to be compensated for any funds that were lost in the process.
For more related reports on cybersecurity and data breaches, check out these recent articles:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCoinbase Hit With Antitrust Suit That Seeks to Change How Crypto Exchanges Operate
3 minute readBaker Botts' Biopharma Client Sues Former In-House Attorney, Others Alleging Extortion Scheme
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250