- Affirmative Recovery
- American Indian Law and Policy
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation
- Appellate Advocacy and Guidance
- Business Litigation
- Civil Rights and Police Misconduct
- Class Action Litigation
- Commercial/Project Finance and Real Estate
- Corporate Governance and Special Situations
- Corporate Restructuring and Bankruptcy
- Domestic and International Arbitration
- Ediscovery
- Health Care Litigation
- Insurance and Catastrophic Loss
- Intellectual Property and Technology Litigation
- Litigation Support Services
- Mass Tort Attorneys
- Medical Malpractice Attorneys
- Personal Injury Attorneys
- Telecommunications Litigation and Arbitration
- Wealth Planning, Administration, and Disputes
-
February 26, 2021Personal Injury and Medical Malpractice Partners Named to Minnesota Lawyer’s Power 30 List
-
February 22, 2021Robins Kaplan Expands Health Care Litigation Group
-
February 1, 2021Meegan Hollywood Selected to Join American Antitrust Institute Advisory Board
-
March 6, 2021With Our Voices 2021 Arc Gala
-
March 6, 20211st Annual Tee It Up for the Troops Winter Outing
-
March, 9, 2021The New Frontier of Software License Disputes
-
Winter 2021Pro Bono Publico–For The Public Good
-
Winter 2021The Case for Charitable Giving
-
Winter 2021The Fictional Wealth Disputes That We Took In and Learned From in 2020
-
February 26, 2021Financial Daily Dose 2.26.2021 | Top Story: Rising Long-Term Bond Yields Blamed for Jumpy Markets
-
February 25, 2021Financial Daily Dose 2.25.2021 | Top Story: McKinsey Ousts Managing Partner on Heels of Opioid Settlement
-
February 24, 2021Financial Daily Dose 2.24.2021 | Top Story: Chair Powell Promises Continued Fed Support for US Economy
Eleventh Circuit Throws Out Privacy Suit Seeking Billions
On December 21, 2009, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a summary judgment decision in favor of Imagitas, Inc.
January 25, 2010
On December 21, 2009, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a summary judgment decision in favor of Imagitas, Inc. Imagitas had been hired by Florida's Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles to solicit advertising, and then place that advertising inside official mailings that remind motor vehicle owners to renew their vehicle registrations. Plaintiffs alleged that the federal Drivers' Privacy Protection Act precludes sending advertising to addresses collected by state departments of motor vehicles absent express consent from the vehicle owners. Plaintiffs further sought billions of dollars in damages, as the DPPA authorizes courts to award $2500 per individual in damages.
The Florida lawsuit is one of many similar lawsuits filed against Imagitas across the United States. In 2007, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation granted Imagitas's motion to have all of the cases coordinated before a single court. That court, in the Middle District of Florida, then agreed to treat the Florida action as a test case. Following expedited discovery, the district court granted Imagitas's motion for summary judgment. The district court agreed with Imagitas that Congress did not prohibit states from advertising, and therefore the inclusion of advertising in state mailings fell within the governmental function exception to the DPPA.
On appeal, plaintiffs primarily urged that the advertising should be considered apart from the registration reminder. The Eleventh Circuit rejected this dichotomy because even "funding public programs through commercial advertising is a legitimate agency function."
Plaintiffs have since requested the Eleventh Circuit to reconsider this decision en banc. Following a decision by the Circuit, the district court will address the impact of the decision on the remaining cases pending against Imagitas. Imagitas is represented by Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi L.L.P. attorney Stephen Safranski.
Related Professionals
Stephen P. Safranski
Partner
Related Publications
Related News
If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.
By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.