Lord & Taylor Data Breach Lawsuit Moved to Manhattan Federal Court
U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika granted Lord & Taylor's request to transfer the suit to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, which is home to the high-end retailer's corporate headquarters and all of its corporate records.
April 25, 2019 at 02:11 PM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Delaware Business Court Insider
A class action lawsuit stemming from a data breach that exposed the personal information of up to 5 million Lord & Taylor customers is heading to Manhattan federal court, where it could be consolidated with a similar case against the Hudson's Bay Co. subsidiary, a Delaware federal judge ruled Thursday.
U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika granted Lord & Taylor's request to transfer the suit to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, which is home to the high-end retailer's corporate headquarters and all of its corporate records.
Both suits, Noreika said, included the same claims for breach of implied contract, negligence and unjust enrichment, and the transfer would allow litigation to proceed more quickly and at a lesser cost to the parties.
“The denial of defendant's motion to transfer would result in at least two suits, involving the same legal and factual issues, to continue simultaneously in different courts,” Noreika wrote in a 12-page memorandum opinion. “Transfer, on the other hand, provides an opportunity for the Southern District of New York to consolidate these cases and decide the issues in a more expeditious and inexpensive manner.”
“Without transfer, these considerations would greatly increase the cost of litigating this case and create inconveniences for many, if not all, of the parties,” she said.
Delaware plaintiff Bernadette Beekman sued Lord & Taylor last April, just days after the company announced that it had been the target of a massive data breach in its North American stores.
According to the filing, a criminal syndicate known as Joker Stash accessed more than 5 million credit and debit cards that were used at Lord & Taylor and Saks Fifth Avenue stores between May 2017 and March 2018, with plans to sell customers' personal data on the dark web.
Attorneys for the proposed class later amended the complaint to add 10 more plaintiffs from New York, Connecticut, Illinois, Kentucky, New Jersey, Georgia and Texas. According to the revised suit, all had overpaid Lord & Taylor for privacy protection services that weren't provided and had been forced to spend time and energy monitoring their accounts for fraudulent activity. Lord & Taylor's failure to protect confidential data, the attorneys said, had exposed its customers to increased risk of identity theft and fraud in the future.
Saks, which is also owned by Hudson's Bay, was not named in the lawsuit.
Lord & Taylor in October moved to transfer the suit to the Southern District, arguing that there was no substantial connection to the First State. The New York action, captioned Rudolph v. Hudson's Bay Co., also named Saks and the firms' parent company as defendants, eliminating the possibility of what Lord & Taylor said could be “piecemeal and duplicative” litigation.
“The Southern District of New York is the only court that could more broadly resolve this dispute, whereas this court could only resolve claims against Lord & Taylor,” the company's Morgan, Lewis & Bockius attorneys said.
In her opinion, Noreika said it would be more expensive and complicated to try the case in Delaware, and agreed that matters of judicial economy supported the transfer. All of the claims, she said, arose in New York, and most of the plaintiffs had made their ill-fated purchases in New York.
“On the record before the court, it appears that most, if not all, of the alleged conduct relating to security failures and knowing violations of obligations to abide by best practices and industry standards concerning the security of its payment systems concerns the actions by defendant in and around New York,” Noreika said. “Given this, and that six of the named plaintiffs made their purchases in New York, this factor weighs in favor of transfer to the Southern District of New York.”
An attorney for Lord & Taylor declined to comment on the ruling and directed press inquiries to representatives from Hudson's Bay. The company's press shot did not immediately respond Thursday to an email seeking comment on the case.
An attorney for the Delaware plaintiffs was not immediately available to comment.
The plaintiffs and proposed class were represented by Ralph N. Sianni of Andersen Sleater Sianni in Wilmington; Janine Pollack of the Sultzer Law Group in New York; Daniel Tepper of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz in New York; Ben Barnow and Erich P. Schork of Barnow And Associates in Chicago; Howard L. Longman and Melissa R. Emert of Stull, Stull & Brody in New York; Charles E. Schaffer of Levin Sedran & Berman in Philadelphia; Jeffrey S. Goldenberg of Goldenberg Schneider in Cincinnati; Gary Mason of Whitfield Bryson & Mason in Washington, D.C.; Laurence D. King and David A. Straite of Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer in New York; John A. Yanchunis and Ryan Mcgee of Morgan & Morgan in Tampa, Florida; Jean Sutton Martin of the Law Office of Jean Sutton Martin in Wilmington; and Lynda J. Grant of The Grant Law Firm in New York.
Lord & Taylor was represented by Gregory T. Parks, Ezra D. Church, Kristin M. Hadgis and Jody C. Barillare of Morgan Lewis.
The case, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, was captioned Beekman v. Lord & Taylor.
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
© 2024 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 AllNY Federal Judge Rules Online-Only Retailers Cannot Face ADA Claims
Morrison Cohen Debuts Luxury Brands Practice as Retailers Navigate Post-Pandemic Landscape
2 minute read'Strong' Legal Theory or 'Oxymoron'? Experts Eye FTC Antitrust Suit Against Mattress Merger
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The Law Firm Disrupted: Playing the Talent Game to Win
- 2GlaxoSmithKline Settles Most Zantac Lawsuits for $2.2B
- 3BD Settles Thousands of Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuits
- 4Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 5Inside Track: Late-Career In-House Leaders Offer Words to Live by
Who Got The Work
Eleanor M. Lackman of Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp has entered an appearance for Canon, the Japanese camera maker, and the Brooklyn Nets in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed Sept. 16 in California Central District Court by T-Rex Law on behalf of technology company Phinge Corporation, pursues claims against the defendants for their ongoing use of the 'Netaverse' mark. The suit contends that the defendants' use of the mark in connection with a virtual reality platform will likely create consumer confusion. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Consuelo B. Marshall, is 2:24-cv-07917, Phinge Corporation v. Yankees Entertainment and Sports Network, LLC et al.
Who Got The Work
Fox Rothschild partner Glenn S. Grindlinger has entered an appearance for Garage Management Company in a pending lawsuit over alleged wage-and-hour violations. The case was filed Aug. 31 in New York Southern District Court by the Abdul Hassan Law Group on behalf of a manual worker who contends that he was not properly compensated for overtime hours worked. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres, is 1:24-cv-06610, Bailey v. Garage Management Company LLC.
Who Got The Work
Veronica M. Keithley of Stoel Rives has entered an appearance for Husky Terminal and Stevedoring LLC in a pending environmental lawsuit. The suit, filed Aug. 12 in Washington Western District Court by Kampmeier & Knutsen on behalf of Communities for a Healthy Bay, seeks to declare that the defendant has violated the Clean Water Act by releasing stormwater discharges on Puget Sound and Commencement Bay. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Benjamin H. Settle, is 3:24-cv-05662, Communities for a Healthy Bay v. Husky Terminal and Stevedoring LLC.
Who Got The Work
Caroline Pignatelli of Cooley has entered an appearance for Cooley, partner Matt Hallinan, retired partner Michael Tu and a pair of Cooley associates in a pending fraud lawsuit related to the firm's representation of startup company Carbon IQ and founder Benjamin Cantey. The case, filed Sept. 26 in New Jersey District Court by the DalCortivo Law Offices on behalf of Gould Ventures and member Jason Gould, contends that the defendants deliberately or recklessly concealed critical information from the plaintiffs regarding fraud allegations against Cantey. Gould claims that he would not have accepted a position on Carbon IQ's board of directors or made a 2022 investment in the company if the fraud allegations had been disclosed. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Robert Kirsch, is 3:24-cv-09485, Gould Ventures, LLC et al v. Cooley, LLP et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom have stepped in to represent PDD Holdings, the operator of online marketplaces Pinduoduo and Temu, in a pending securities class action. The case, filed Sept. 30 in New York Eastern District Court by Labaton Keller Sucharow and VanOverbeke, Michaud & Timmony, contends that the defendants concealed information that rendered the growth of PDD unsustainable and posed substantial risks to PDD’s business, including merchant policies that made it unprofitable for vendors to do business on PDD platforms; malware issues on PDD applications; and PDD’s failure to implement effective compliance systems. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-06881, Macomb County Retiree Health Care Fund v. Pdd Holdings Inc. et al.
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