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: Workers’ Compensation Act does not bar claims under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy ActAlerts

    Alert / Cybersecurity & Privacy Alert

    Illinois Supreme Court: Workers’ Compensation Act does not bar claims under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act

    Feb 4, 2022

    Share

    By John Ruskusky and Richard Tilghman IV

    This highly anticipated decision allows employment-related BIPA cases to resume.

    What’s the Impact?

    • Employers defending or facing BIPA lawsuits find no relief in yesterday’s ruling
    • This decision reminds all businesses using biometric technology to maintain compliance with BIPA

    DOWNLOADS

    On February 3, 2022, the Illinois Supreme Court decided McDonald v. Symphony Bronzeville Park, LLC, et al., holding that “personal and societal injuries” stemming from violations of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) are “not the type of injury…preempted by the exclusive remedy provisions of the” Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act (IWCA). For employers engaged in BIPA litigation, the McDonald decision was the most highly anticipated decision since the Illinois Supreme Court’s January 2019 opinion in Rosenbach v. Six Flags Entertainment Corp., 2019 IL 123186.[1]

    In recent years, employers using biometric technology have been subject to a barrage of class action litigation alleging violations of BIPA’s notice and consent requirements.[2] Most employment-related BIPA cases have shared similar allegations.

    The plaintiff in McDonald, an employee, alleged that her employer collected and stored her biometric information for timekeeping purposes without complying with BIPA’s requirements to (a) provide written notice to its employees, (b) obtain informed written consent from each employee that used a biometric device, and (c) publish a publicly available written policy regarding the company’s retention and destruction guidelines for biometric information. In her amended complaint, the plaintiff did not allege actual harm but instead sought statutory liquidated damages of $1,000 per negligent violation or $5,000 per intentional violation.

    Many Illinois employers, including the McDonald defendant, have attempted to dismiss identical BIPA claims by arguing that injuries resulting from employees’ use of biometric technology constitute a harm covered by the exclusivity provisions of the IWCA. Plaintiffs have countered that injuries stemming from BIPA violations are not the type of injury compensable under the IWCA, which is a required element for preemption. The trial court in McDonald sided with the plaintiff, and in September 2020, following an interlocutory appeal, the Illinois Appellate Court affirmed the trial court’s ruling.[3] The Illinois Supreme Court accepted the McDonald appeal to answer whether “the exclusivity provisions of the [IWCA] bar a claim for statutory damages under [BIPA] where an employer is alleged to have violated an employee’s statutory privacy rights.”

    The Illinois Supreme Court’s opinion focused on the narrow question of whether the plaintiff’s injury was “compensable” under the IWCA. The defendant argued that the IWCA’s exclusivity provisions were broadly worded to cover any injury “arising out of and in the course of employment.” The plaintiff countered that “privacy inquiries are foreign to the workers’ compensation system” and that the primary purpose of the IWCA—to “provide financial protection for injured workers until they can return to the workforce”—would not be given its full effect if applied to BIPA claims.

    To reach its conclusion, the court reviewed the IWCA’s legislative history, as well as past IWCA preemption decisions, paying particular attention to the various types of injuries for which preemption has previously been found and distinguishing them from the “personal and societal” injuries stemming from a BIPA violation. Ultimately, the court found, based on precedent, that a compensable injury was one that caused “a harmful change in the human organism.” Unlike physical or psychological work injuries, the court reasoned that the plaintiff’s “lost opportunity ‘to say no by withholding consent’” was not an injury within the purview of the IWCA.

    In a concurring opinion, Justice Burke noted that the plaintiff amended her pleading to remove any allegation that she suffered mental anguish from the purported violations of BIPA. She stated that “[h]ad McDonald persisted in her allegation of mental anguish, the exclusivity provisions of the Compensation Act would have barred her claim.”

    Numerous BIPA cases that arose in the employment context were stayed while McDonald remained pending. With McDonald now decided, many employment-related BIPA cases will now resume. For employers using biometric technology in the workplace, the McDonald decision is another reminder of the importance of maintaining compliance with BIPA.


    1. “Illinois Supreme Court decision allows for biometric privacy claims to proceed without a showing of actual harm,” January 25, 2019.
      [Back to reference]
    2. “Using fingerprints for timekeeping purposes in Illinois—what you need to know about the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act,” October 19, 2017.
      [Back to reference]
    3. “Illinois Workers’ Compensation Act does not preempt biometric privacy claims brought by employees,” September 23, 2020.
      [Back to reference]
    PrivacyCybersecurity

    Locations

    Chicago

    Practices

    Cybersecurity & PrivacyBiometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA)LitigationClass Actions & Aggregate 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 Jason Kravitz to lead its Privacy & Technology practice

      Feb 24, 2022
    • Alert

      36 hours: What banks should know about the upcoming compliance deadline for reporting computer security incidents

      Feb 16, 2022

    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