Full-Service Law Firm solving complex challenges through bold thinking, precise execution, and shared purpose.

Full Service Law Firm | Michael Best & Friedrich LLP

Specializing in the Intersection of Business &amp; Government

Meet our team of trusted advisors, strategic thinkers, and community builders dedicated to client success.

Learn about our full-service legal and business solutions, designed to address complex challenges for leading organizations across industries.

Access thought leadership, news, and resources to stay informed about the latest trends, legal developments, and industry innovations.

Discover how partnership, bold thinking, and precise execution drive results for clients nationwide.

Explore how our national reach and local expertise support clients across the United States and beyond.

Grow at a firm designed to bring out your best.

On April 11, the Illinois Senate voted 49-13 to amend the state's Biometric Information Privacy Act, limiting the number of claims that accrue in common applications. In Cothron v. White Castle, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that a new claim accrued each time an individual scanned his or her biometric information. With employees using biometric markers such as thumb prints to use time clocks or access restricted spaces, an employee could accrue dozens of claims in a single day. With statutory damages of $1,000 - $5,000 per violation, the rule announced in Cothron could result in astronomical damage awards. Following the Supreme Court's invitation, SB 2979 revises the accrual rule so that if a private entity collects or discloses an individual's biometric information multiple times using the same collection method, it will result in only one claim. This rule would essentially limit an employee to one BIPA claim against his or her employer, even if the employee scans his or her biometric identifier multiple times each day throughout his or her employment. The revision also adds a definition for an “electronic signature” so employees can acknowledge in writing that they received required disclosures using commonly available technology.The bill was backed by industry groups looking to put a check on virtually unlimited exposure, though some groups argue the bill does not go far enough as it is not expressly retroactive. The bill now moves to the House for consideration.<input type='hidden' id='passle-remote-hosting-tracking-shortcode' value='102j5bd'/><blockquote class="wp-block-quote passle-quote has-cite-link"><cite><a href="https://www.law360.com/illinois/articles/1824356?nl_pk=956756b8-8a06-470e-9fec-af2978acc71b&#038;utm_content=2024-04-12&#038;read_more=1&#038;nlsidx=1&#038;nlaidx=1" aria-label="www.law360.com/..." title="https://www.law360.com/illinois/articles/1824356?nl_pk=956756b8-8a06-470e-9fec-af2978acc71b&amp;utm_content=2024-04-12&amp;read_more=1&amp;nlsidx=1&amp;nlaidx=1" target="_blank">www.law360.com/...</a></cite></blockquote>

Illinois Senate votes to rein in BIPA damages

Related People

Related Capabilities

You may also be interested in these

USTR Announces President Trump’s 2026 “America First” Trade Policy Agenda

From Idea to Asset: Turning a Business Name into a Protectable Brand

Merging Missions: What Religious Non-Profits Need to Know Before Joining Forces