Nixon Peabody LLP

  • People
  • Capabilities
  • Insights
  • About

Trending Topics

    • People
    • Capabilities
    • Insights
    • About
    • Locations
    • Events
    • Careers
    • Alumni

    Practices

    View All

    • Affordable Housing
    • Community Development Finance
    • Corporate & Finance
    • Cybersecurity & Privacy
    • Environmental
    • Franchising & Distribution
    • Government Investigations & White Collar Defense
    • Healthcare
    • Intellectual Property
    • International Services
    • Labor & Employment
    • Litigation
    • Private Wealth & Advisory
    • Project Finance
    • Public Finance
    • Real Estate
    • Regulatory & Government Relations

    Industries

    View All

    • Cannabis
    • Consumer
    • Energy
    • Entertainment
    • Financial Services
    • Healthcare
    • Higher Education
    • Infrastructure
    • Manufacturing
    • Non Profit
    • Real Estate
    • Technology

    Value-Added Services

    View All

    • Alternative Fee Arrangements

      Developing innovative pricing structures and alternative fee agreement models that deliver additional value for our clients.

    • Continuing Education

      Advancing professional knowledge and offering credits for attorneys, staff and other professionals.

    • Crisis Advisory

      Helping clients respond correctly when a crisis occurs.

    • DEI Strategic Services

      Providing our clients with legal, strategic, and practical advice to make transformational changes in their organizations.

    • eDiscovery

      Leveraging law and technology to deliver sound solutions.

    • Global Services

      Delivering seamless service through partnerships across the globe.

    • Innovation

      Leveraging leading-edge technology to guide change and create seamless, collaborative experiences for clients and attorneys.

    • IPED

      Industry-leading conferences focused on affordable housing, tax credits, and more.

    • Legal Project Management

      Providing actionable information to support strategic decision-making.

    • Legally Green

      Teaming with clients to advance sustainable projects, mitigate the effects of climate change, and protect our planet.

    • Nixon Peabody Trust Company

      Offering a range of investment management and fiduciary services.

    • NP Capital Connector

      Bringing together companies and investors for tomorrow’s new deals.

    • NP Second Opinion

      Offering fresh insights on cases that are delayed, over budget, or off-target from the desired resolution.

    • NP Trial

      Courtroom-ready lawyers who can resolve disputes early on clients’ terms or prevail at trial before a judge or jury.

    • Social Impact

      Creating positive impact in our communities through increasing equity, access, and opportunity.

    1. Home
    2. Insights
    3. Alerts
    4. Illinois Supreme Court rules that insurer is required to defend claim under Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”)Alerts

    Alert / Privacy Law Alert

    Illinois Supreme Court rules that insurer is required to defend claim under Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”)

    May 26, 2021

    Share

    By John Ruskusky, Richard Tilghman IV and Christopher Mason

    On Thursday May 20, 2021, the Illinois Supreme Court decided a potentially important coverage case for BIPA defendants. In West Bend Mutual Insurance Co. v. Krishna Schaumburg Tan, Inc., the court held that an insurer owed a duty to defend its insured against BIPA class action claims where the insurance policies at issue provided coverage for injuries due to “oral or written publication of material that violates a person’s right of privacy.” [1] Specifically, the court held that the term “publication” as used in the policies encompassed communications of private information to even a single third party. The court found the underlying complaint’s allegations that Krishna unlawfully disclosed biometric information to its third-party vendor satisfied this test. [2]

    The court’s decision, while significant for being the first of its kind with respect to insurance coverage for BIPA claims, has other potential implications. It comes as two Illinois appellate courts are considering whether a one-year limitations period for claims involving “publication of matter violating the right to privacy” applies to BIPA. [3] Thus, the focus on the scope of the term “publication” in West Bend may be important.

    Since the Rosenbach v. Six Flags decision triggered a tidal wave of BIPA class actions, [4] litigants have devoted tomes of briefing to the question of whether a one-year limitations period applies to BIPA claims. Defendants argue the one-year limitations period applies because the ultimate harm BIPA is designed to protect against is the unlawful disclosure—or “publication”—of biometric information. [5] Plaintiffs argue that disclosure in the BIPA context is not equivalent to a “publication of private information” because it often involves only the sharing of biometric information with third-party vendors as opposed to the public at large.

    Many state and federal trial courts have questioned or rejected a one-year limitations period for BIPA claims. Recently, however, some BIPA cases have been stayed for the appellate courts to review, and ultimately decide, whether disclosure of biometric information constitutes a “publication of private information” sufficient to trigger the one-year limitations period. The appellate courts’ decisions may depend on the interpretation and scope of the term “publication” as applied to the disclosure of biometric information.

    Enter the Illinois Supreme Court’s West Bend opinion. The court’s primary task in West Bend was to determine the scope of the term “publication” as used in the policies and resolve whether Krishna’s alleged transmission of biometric data to its third-party vendor in violation of BIPA fell within the policy’s scope.[6]  West Bend, as the insurer, contended that publication meant only a communication of information to the public. [7] Krishna, as the insured, argued that publication also included communications made to a single party such as its third-party vendor.[8]

    Notably, the policies at issue in West Bend did not define the term “publication,” so the court relied on other sources to inform its analysis. Reviewing dictionary definitions for the term as well as definitions from the Restatement (Second) of Torts, the court found those sources supportive of interpreting “publication” to include communications to even a single third party. [9]

    The court’s review of these sources could play a key role in the Tims and Marion decisions because those appellate courts similarly will have to ascertain the type of “publication” required to trigger a one-year limitations period for BIPA claims. The appeals in Tims and Marion are fully briefed, and thus, an appellate court ruling could come in the next few months. Depending on the outcome of those appeals, a further appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court is likely.

    The development of appellate case law in the biometric privacy space is an important reminder that biometric privacy regulation is here to stay. Nixon Peabody has assisted numerous clients in updating disclosures and policies to ensure that liability under BIPA, and other biometric privacy laws [10], is minimized.


    1. 2021 IL 125978, ¶62.[Back to reference] [Back to reference]
    2. Id. ¶¶38-43, 50, 62.[Back to reference]
    3. See Tims v. Black Horse Carriers, No. 1-20-0563 (Ill. Ct. App. 1st Dist.); Marion v. Ring Container Techs., No. 3-20-0184 (Ill. Ct. App. 3rd Dist.) [Back to reference]
    4. https://www.nixonpeabody.com/ideas/articles/2019/01/25/illinois-biometric-information-privacy-act-ruling [Back to reference]
    5. BIPA expressly prohibits the disclosure of a person’s biometric information without providing notice and obtaining their consent. See 740 ILCS 14/15(d). [Back to reference]
    6. 2021 IL 125978, ¶38-43, 45. [Back to reference]
    7. Id., ¶39. [Back to reference]
    8. Id. [Back to reference]
    9. Id., ¶41, 42. [Back to reference]
    10. https://www.nixonpeabody.com/en/ideas/blog/data-privacy/2021/05/11/nyc-biometric-privacy-law-what-do-businesses-need-to-know [Back to reference]
    Privacy

    Locations

    Chicago

    Practices

    Cybersecurity & PrivacyBiometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA)LitigationClass Actions & Aggregate LitigationComplex DisputesInsurance Litigation

    Insights And Happenings

    • Press Release

      Nixon Peabody adds a team of four litigation partners to its Los Angeles office bolstering its labor and employment and general litigation bench strength and trial capabilities

      March 28, 2022
    • Press Release

      Nixon Peabody selects John Ruskusky as leader of the firm’s Complex Disputes practice

      Feb 7, 2022
    • Alert

      The Seventh Circuit certifies question regarding accrual of BIPA claims to Illinois Supreme Court

      Dec 22, 2021

    Subscribe to stay informed of the latest legal news, alerts, and business trends.Subscribe

    • People
    • Capabilities
    • Insights
    • About
    • Locations
    • Events
    • Careers
    • Alumni
    • © 2023 Nixon Peabody. All rights reserved
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use
    • Statement of Client Rights
    • Supplier Diversity Program
    • Nixon Peabody International LLC
    • PAL