Yahoo Agrees to Pay $85M to Settle Consumer Data Breach Class Actions
The settlement, filed in court on Monday, includes a $50 million fund from which consumers can file claims to be reimbursed, credit monitoring and $35 million in attorney fees.
October 23, 2018 at 03:21 PM
4 minute read
|
Yahoo Inc. has agreed to pay up to $85 million to settle consumer class actions brought over its recent data breaches.
The settlement, filed in court on Monday, includes a $50 million fund from which consumers can file claims to be reimbursed. In addition, Yahoo has agreed to provide credit monitoring and pay up to $35 million in attorney fees.
The deal is one of the largest data breach settlements in U.S. history, resolving legal claims for more than 200 people with about 1 billion Yahoo accounts from 2012 to 2016.
“We are pleased that we were able to reach a settlement with Yahoo, which would provide relief to impacted users and ensure that Yahoo improves its security practices going forward,” wrote lead plaintiffs attorney John Yanchunis of Morgan & Morgan in Tampa, Florida.
Representatives from Altaba Inc., the new name for Yahoo since it was sold to Verizon, and Oath Holdings Inc., which owns Yahoo's operating company, declined to comment. Ann Mortimer of Hunton Andrews Kurth in Los Angeles represented the defendant in the case.
Yahoo previously filed a notice of the settlement but provided few details at that time other than a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that said it had set aside $47 million in additional expenses to help pay for class actions related to the breach.
U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh of the Northern District of California, who granted final approval to a separate $80 million settlement that resolved securities class actions relating to Yahoo's data breaches, is slated to hear arguments on whether to approve the motion for preliminary approval of the settlement at a Nov. 29 hearing in San Jose, California.
Yahoo announced in 2016 that 500 million accounts had been hacked in 2014, compromising names, email addresses, phone numbers, birth dates and passwords. Months later, Yahoo disclosed another breach in 2013 that affected 1 billion people, a figure that Verizon increased to 3 billion last year. The settlement also involves a third breach in 2015 and 2016.
In March, Koh refused to dismiss a consolidated complaint in the case, allowing punitive damages to go forward. Yahoo also paid $35 million to resolve SEC claims that it failed to notify investors for two years about its 2014 breach.
The settlement comes after plaintiffs lawyers filed a class certification motion, which Yahoo opposed on Sept. 1. It also follows the depositions of several former Yahoo executives, including former chief information security officer Alex Stamos and former chief information officer Jay Rossiter. Other depositions were planned for Yahoo's former general counsel, Ron Bell, and former CEO Marissa Mayer.
Both sides reached a settlement after two all-day mediation sessions in San Francisco on Aug. 14 and Sept. 7 before former San Francisco Superior Court Judge Daniel Weinstein, now at JAMS, according to court documents. The settlement also includes data breach cases brought in California state court, coordinated in Orange County Superior Court, and class actions brought in Israel.
Under the deal, Yahoo will provide at least two years of credit monitoring and identity theft protection insurance to class members, and implement enhancements to its security programs. It also will pay up to $35 million in fees and $2.5 million in costs and expenses to plaintiffs' lawyers, who plan to file a motion “supported with detailed lodestar information and an accounting of expenses.”
As part of the fund, claimants can seek cash reimbursements for out-of-pocket costs, such as fraud charges and professional fees, associated with the breaches. Small businesses and others who paid for Yahoo accounts can submit claims for up to 25 percent reimbursement, and class members who already have credit monitoring also can submit claims for at least $100 in alternative compensation.
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 AllContract Software Unicorn Ironclad Hires Former Pinterest Lawyer as GC
2 minute readSouthern California Law Firms Boast Industry-Leading Revenue, Demand Through Q3
Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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