Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act-Class Action

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Latrina Cothron v. White Castle System, Inc.

Case No.: 20-3202

Officials: Sykes, Chief Judge, and Easterbrook and Brennan, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act-Class Action

Cothron is a manager at a White Castle restaurant in Illinois, where she’s required to use her fingerprint for access to the restaurant’s computer system. Following each fingerprint scan, her biometric data is collected and sent to a third-party vendor for verification purposes. Cothron alleges that White Castle neglected to obtain her written consent prior to implementing this fingerprint scanning system, consequently violating the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, specifically 740 ILCS 14/1. In response, she initiated a proposed class-action lawsuit, seeking to represent all Illinois-based White Castle employees affected by the situation.

White Castle contended that a claim would have arisen under the Act the moment Cothron first utilized her fingerprint for the system after the law’s enactment in 2008. This viewpoint rendered her lawsuit untimely. Cothron, on the other hand, argued that each unauthorized fingerprint scan represented a distinct violation of the statute, leading to a fresh claim with each scan.

The district judge dismissed White Castle’s assertion of a “one time only” occurrence but opted to allow an interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. 1292(b). The Seventh Circuit Court then posed the question to the Illinois Supreme Court, seeking clarification: Should claims under sections 15(b) and 15(d) be considered as accruing each time a private entity scans an individual’s biometric identifier and transmits such data to a third party, respectively, or should they only be deemed to accrue upon the initial scan and transmission?

Affirmed.

Decided 08/23/23

Full Text