Search for: "IN RE: Target Corporation Customer Data Security Breach Litigation"
Results 1 - 20
of 85
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Dec 2014, 8:06 am
On December 18th, the District Court for the District of Minnesota ruled on defendant's motion to dismiss in In re: Target Corporation Customer Data Security Breach Litigation. [read post]
27 Feb 2015, 12:27 pm
The attackers breached a database that contained over 80 million records of past and current customers, and Anthem employees. [read post]
15 Dec 2014, 6:28 am
In re Target Corporation Customer Data Security Breach Litigation (“ In re Target”), 2014 WL 6775314 (U.S.District Court for the District of Minnesota 2014). [read post]
21 May 2017, 8:04 pm
In In re: Target Corporation Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, No. 14-2522 (D. [read post]
21 May 2017, 8:04 pm
In In re: Target Corporation Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, No. 14-2522 (D. [read post]
23 Jan 2015, 8:17 am
Security Litigation, Case No. 09-1043. 2009 WL 4798148 (D.N.J. [read post]
20 Jun 2023, 7:47 am
” Indeed, Corporate Counsel magazine named data privacy litigation as the number-one class action trend to watch in 2023. [read post]
8 Jun 2023, 9:00 am
” Indeed, Corporate Counsel magazine named data privacy litigation as the number-one class action trend to watch in 2023. [read post]
16 Jun 2020, 2:18 pm
Corporate defense lawyers assert that these sacred protections allow corporate executives to manage data security incidents without fear that their words could later be used against them in litigation. [read post]
23 Oct 2017, 4:22 pm
For example, in 2016, a Minnesota federal judge granted motions to dismiss filed by Target Corporation’s executives, directors and the board of director’s special litigation committee after the special litigation committee issued a 91-page report concluding that Target should not pursue derivative claims against officers and directors based on the company’s 2013 cyber breach incident,[7] which affected approximately… [read post]
23 Oct 2017, 4:22 pm
For example, in 2016, a Minnesota federal judge granted motions to dismiss filed by Target Corporation’s executives, directors and the board of director’s special litigation committee after the special litigation committee issued a 91-page report concluding that Target should not pursue derivative claims against officers and directors based on the company’s 2013 cyber breach incident,[7] which affected approximately… [read post]
Guest Post: Preparing for a Cyber Caremark Lawsuit: Lessons from the Home Depot Derivative Complaint
23 Sep 2015, 4:40 pm
In re Caremark International Inc. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 10:54 am
No deal-maker wants to buy a breach or compromised data set that will results in years of costly litigation, especially if those issues could have been identified during the due diligence process. [read post]
4 Jun 2014, 4:34 am
As I have frequently noted on this site (refer, for example, here), cyber security issues increasingly are a board level concern, and indeed, recent shareholder litigation has shown that investors intend to hold board members accountable when data breaches cause problems for their companies. [read post]
4 Sep 2014, 3:19 am
[iii] So too has the plaintiffs’ bar recognized that cyber security breaches may become a lucrative addition to their class action litigation practices. [read post]
21 May 2016, 5:42 am
Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, MDL Case No. 14-2522, 2015 U.S. [read post]
13 Apr 2016, 4:55 pm
It is not a mere coincidence that law firms increasingly are targeted in data breach attacks. [read post]
31 Jan 2019, 2:03 pm
As described below, state, federal and international breach notification laws arguably do not apply to ransomware attacks because no corporate data is actually pilfered. [read post]
19 Jul 2017, 12:37 pm
On this point, the court’s decision is similar to the court’s reasoning in In re Target Corporation Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, Case No. 0:14-md-02522-PAM (D. [read post]
31 Dec 2015, 5:30 am
In re: Target Corporation Customer MDL, No. 14-2522 (D. [read post]
