California Laws|Section 1798.150.

                                                

1798.150.  

Personal Information Security Breaches

(a) (1) Any consumer whose nonencrypted and nonredacted personal information, as defined in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 1798.81.5, or whose email address in combination with a password or security question and answer that would permit access to the account is subject to an unauthorized access and exfiltration, theft, or disclosure as a result of the business’s violation of the duty to implement and maintain reasonable security procedures and practices appropriate to the nature of the information to protect the personal information may institute a civil action for any of the following:

(A) To recover damages in an amount not less
than one hundred dollars ($100) and not greater than seven hundred and fifty ($750) per consumer per incident or actual damages, whichever is greater.

(B) Injunctive or declaratory relief.

(C) Any other relief the court deems proper.

(2) In assessing the amount of statutory damages, the court shall consider any one or more of the relevant circumstances presented by any of the parties to the case, including, but not limited to, the nature and seriousness of the misconduct, the number of violations, the persistence of the misconduct, the length of time over which the misconduct occurred, the willfulness of the defendant’s misconduct, and the defendant’s assets, liabilities, and net worth.

(b) Actions pursuant to this section may be brought by a consumer
if, prior to initiating any action against a business for statutory damages on an individual or class-wide basis, a consumer provides a business 30 days’ written notice identifying the specific provisions of this title the consumer alleges have been or are being violated. In the event a cure is possible, if within the 30 days the business actually cures the noticed violation and provides the consumer an express written statement that the violations have been cured and that no further violations shall occur, no action for individual statutory damages or class-wide statutory damages may be initiated against the business. The implementation and maintenance of reasonable security procedures and practices pursuant to Section 1798.81.5 following a breach does not constitute a cure with respect to that breach. No notice shall be required prior to an individual consumer initiating an action solely for actual pecuniary damages suffered as a result of the alleged violations of this title. If a business continues to
violate this title in breach of the express written statement provided to the consumer under this section, the consumer may initiate an action against the business to enforce the written statement and may pursue statutory damages for each breach of the express written statement, as well as any other violation of the title that postdates the written statement.

(c) The cause of action established by this section shall apply only to violations as defined in subdivision (a) and shall not be based on violations of any other section of this title. Nothing in this title shall be interpreted to serve as the basis for a private right of action under any other law. This shall not be construed to relieve any party from any duties or obligations imposed under other law or the United States or California Constitution.

(Amended November 3, 2020, by initiative Proposition 24, Sec. 16. Effective December 16, 2020. Operative January 1, 2023, pursuant to Sec. 31 of Proposition 24.)

View Latest Rulings

Pursuant to Civil Code section 1798.150, subdivision (b): Actions pursuant to this section may be brought by a consumer if, prior to initiating any action against a business for statutory damages on an individual or class-wide basis, a consumer provides a business 30 days' written notice identifying the specific provisions of this title the consumer alleges have been or are being violated.

  • Case No.

    37-2022-00024493-CU-MC-CTL

  • Hearing

    Jan 06, 2023

  • County

    San Diego County, CA

The action for damages defined by section 1798.150 is dependent on the occurrence of the violation, which gives rise to automatic damages of one hundred dollars. This is akin to a civil penalty. On the other hand, section 1798.90.54, on which this action is based, creates a civil action for damages that is dependent on the occurrence of a violation which causes harm. Harm must be demonstrated to establish standing, even if the damages that flow from this harm are minimal.

  • Name

    MATA VS. DIGITAL RECOGNITION NETWORK INC

  • Case No.

    37-2021-00023321-CU-MC-CTL

  • Hearing

    May 03, 2024

  • County

    San Diego County, CA

The action for damages defined by section 1798.150 is dependent on the occurrence of the violation, which gives rise to automatic damages of one hundred dollars. This is akin to a civil penalty. On the other hand, section 1798.90.54, on which this action is based, creates a civil action for damages that is dependent on the occurrence of a violation which causes harm. Harm must be demonstrated to establish standing, even if the damages that flow from this harm are minimal.

  • Name

    MATA VS. DIGITAL RECOGNITION NETWORK INC

  • Case No.

    37-2021-00023321-CU-MC-CTL

  • Hearing

    Apr 25, 2024

  • County

    San Diego County, CA

View More Rulings

View Latest Dockets

1 File
Filed

Feb 02, 2024

Status

Active

Judge

Hon. Kenneth R. Freeman Trellis Spinner 👉 Discover key insights by exploring more analytics for Kenneth R. Freeman

Court

Superior

County

Los Angeles County, CA

Category

Other Commercial/Business Tort (not fraud/ breach of contract) (General Jurisdiction)

Practice Area

Commercial

Matter Type

Breach of Contract

View More Dockets
Previous Section

Doc thumbnail Section 1798.148.

Next Section

Doc thumbnail Section 1798.155.

View Latest Documents

preview-icon Preview

ELECTRONICALLY FILED Auto) BARTHEL LEGAL, APC SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA Nicholas Barthel, Esq. (319105) COUNTY OF SAN BERNAF {DINO 11/28/2023 4:37 PM nick@barthelbarthel.com 2173 Salk Ave., Ste. 250 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Telephone: (760) …

Case Filed

Nov 18, 2022

Case Status

Active

County

San Bernardino County, CA

Filed Date

Nov 28, 2023

Category

Breach of Contract/Warranty Unlimited

Judge Hon. Thomas S Garza Trellis Spinner 👉 Discover key insights by exploring more analytics for Thomas S Garza
preview-icon 36 pages

ELECTRONICALLY FILED Superior Court of California, SPINELLI, DONALD & NOTT County of Placer A Professional Corporation 01/18/2023 at 11:12:45 AM LYNN A. GARCIA (State Bar No. 131196) By: Marina C Olivarez Fuentes 601 University Avenue, Suite 225 …

Case Filed

Mar 23, 2022

Case Status

Open

County

Placer County, CA

Filed Date

Jun 27, 2023

Category

PI/PD/WD Tort: Other (23)

preview-icon 36 pages

ELECTRONICALLY FILED Superior Court of California, SPINELLI, DONALD & NOTT County of Placer A Professional Corporation 01/18/2023 at 11:12:45 AM LYNN A. GARCIA (State Bar No. 131196) By: Marina C Olivarez Fuentes 601 University Avenue, Suite 225 …

Case Filed

Mar 23, 2022

Case Status

Open

County

Placer County, CA

Filed Date

Jan 18, 2023

Category

PI/PD/WD Tort: Other (23)

preview-icon 4 pages

Electronically FILED by Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles on 01/02/2020 04:39 PM Sherri R. Carter, Executive Officer/Clerk of Court, by M. Scott,Deputy Clerk 20BBCV00002 Assigned for all purposes to: Burbank Courthouse, Judicial Officer: William Stewart Mikhail Goldman, in ProPer 1 12747 Riverside Drive, # 213 Valley Vi…

Case Filed

Jan 02, 2020

Case Status

Request for Dismissal - Before Trial not following ADR or more than 60 days since ADR 07/01/2020

County

Los Angeles County, CA

Filed Date

Jan 02, 2020

Category

Other Non-Personal Injury/Property Damage tort (General Jurisdiction)

Judge Hon. William D. Stewart Trellis Spinner 👉 Discover key insights by exploring more analytics for William D. Stewart
preview-icon 1 page

POS-015 ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY STATE BAR NO: 222113 FOR COURT USE ONLY NAME: Jason M. Wucetich FIRM NAME: WUCETICH & KOROVILAS LLP STREET ADDRESS: 222 N. PCH Blvd., Ste. 2000 CITY: El Segundo STATE: ZIP CODE: 9024…

County

Santa Clara County, CA

Filed Date

Jan 25, 2024

Category

Business Tort/Unfair Bus Prac Unlimited (07)

Judge Hon. Patricia Guerrero Trellis Spinner 👉 Discover key insights by exploring more analytics for Patricia Guerrero
View More Documents

Please wait a moment while we load this page.

New Envelope