​​Geico Should Face Data Breach Class Action in California, Consumers Argue

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

Geico Data Breach Class Action Overview: 

• Who: California consumers have urged the court to keep their class action lawsuit against Geico in the state.
• What: They argue that the lawsuit, which followed a massive data breach at Geico, has claims specific to the state that cannot be litigated with New York claimants’ cases.
• Where: The lawsuit is pending in California federal court.

Geico should have to face a data breach class action lawsuit alleging violations of the California Consumer Privacy Act in California (CCPA), consumers argue, after the company tried to get a stay on the lawsuit or move it to New York with other related cases.

Mark Edward and Reanna Ann Vennerholm urged a California federal judge to reject Geico’s bid, saying that the case does not meet the requirements of the first-to-file rule and the stay or transfer would not promote judicial efficiency due to the differences between the cases.

Geico has already attempted to centralize the class action lawsuit into a multidistrict litigation, but that effort was denied by the courts after the couple removed a national claim.

“Geico now attempts a second bite of the apple by moving this court to stay or transfer this action to the Eastern District of New York,” the couple argues. “However, this Court should reject Geico’s motion to stay or transfer this case because, among other things, Geico cannot meet the issue-similarity requirement under the first-to-file rule.”

They add that while “the heart” of the cases are similar being both based on the data breach, “that is where the similarities between this case and the Mirvis Action end.”

“Unlike the common law claims at the center of the actions consolidated in New York, plaintiffs allege a claim against Geico under the [California Consumer Privacy Act], a unique California statute,” the Vennerholms argue.

Personal Information Hacked By Fraudsters Who Used Info To Apply For Unemployment Benefits

The CCPA makes a person harmed by a data breach eligible to recover statutory damages in the range of $100 – $750 “per consumer per incident or actual damages,” whichever is greater, injunctive or declaratory relief, and any other relief that a court deems proper.

“By providing statutory damages, the CCPA removes the standing requirements that has been a bar to most prior data breach litigations,” the couple says.

The Vennerholms class action was filed following Geico’s Jan. 21 to March 1 data breach. In April, Geico revealed that its customers’ personal information had been hacked by fraudsters, who used the stolen information to fraudulently apply for unemployment benefits in the names of GEICO’s customers.

Meanwhile, Geico is facing a separate class action lawsuit in Texas after it allegedly failed to pay the full insurance claim for a totaled vehicle as laid out in its policies. Drivers in Florida filed a similar suit in September, saying that Geico has only been paying 80 percent of personal injury protection charges in cases where it should have been paying the whole amount.

Let us know if your data was compromised in the Geico breach in the comments section below!

The plaintiffs are represented by Andrew D. Stolper, Jason M. Frank and Scott H. Sims of Frank Sims & Stolper LLP and by Franklin D. Azar, Michael D. Murphy and Brian Hanlin of Franklin D. Azar & Associates PC.

Geico is represented by Anne K. Edwards, Theodore H. Dokko, John P. Marino and Kristen L. Wenger of Smith Gambrell & Russell LLP.

The Geico Data Breach Class Action Lawsuit is Vennerholm II et al. v. GEICO Casualty Company et al., Case No. 3:21-cv-00806, in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Recall Check: Porsche Recalls Nearly 12,000 Taycan Vehicles Over Automatic Hazard Lights
• Progressive Schemed With Mitchell to Reduce Payouts for Total Loss Cars, Class Action Alleges
• Geico To Pay $24M To Settle Claims It Short-changed Customers With Totaled Cars
• Nissan Transmission Defect Settlement Totaling $277.7M Gets Prelim Approval