Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
No Harm, No Foul: The Fourth Circuit Struggles with the “Injury-in-Fact” Requirement to Article III Standing in Data Breach Class Actions Cover

No Harm, No Foul: The Fourth Circuit Struggles with the “Injury-in-Fact” Requirement to Article III Standing in Data Breach Class Actions

By:   
Open Access
|May 2018

Abstract

On February 6, 2017, in Beck v. McDonald, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that the increased risk of future identity theft created by two data breaches was too speculative to constitute an injury-in-fact for the purposes of Article III standing. The court surveyed the split between its sister circuits and determined that, without allegations that a thief deliberately targeted information, misused, or attempted to misuse that personal information, the risk of identity theft was not sufficiently high so as to meet the injury-in-fact requirement of Article III standing. This Comment examines the Fourth Circuit’s holding and argues that the deepening split among circuits leaves plaintiffs uncertain about how to adequately plead injury-in-fact.

Journal eISSN: 1930-661X
Language: English
Page range: 462 - 481
Published on: May 22, 2018
Published by: Boston College Law School
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

© 2018 Brandon Ferrick, published by Boston College Law School
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons License.