An insurer asks for declaratory relief from the court finding that it is not required to defend its client in a class action alleging Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act violations.
Attorney Matthew Bloom of Meagher & Geer in Chicago filed the complaint on behalf of Church Mutual Insurance Company, now known as Church Mutual Insurance Company S.I., on Aug. 18 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois against Stillwater Senior Living LLC and Sierra Allen.
The plaintiff seeks a “determination of the parties’ rights and obligations under insurance policies issued by Church Mutual …”
According to the complaint, Allen filed a prospective class action against Stillwater for allegedly violating BIPA by requiring employees to use a fingerprint scanner to clock in and out of work. Stillwater allegedly failed to provide notice to Allen or the putative class members about where their fingerprints were being stored, for how long and what would happen to their biometric information. Allen also alleges Stillwater failed to disclose which third parties it directly or indirectly shared the information with.
Allen alleges she and the putative class members are entitled to an order requiring Stillwater to make disclosures consistent with BIPA and enjoining “further unlawful conduct.” She seeks an order requiring Stillwater to publicly disclose a written policy establishing the collection, storage and use of biometric data; an order requiring Stillwater to disclose whether it retained biometric data; an order requiring Stillwater to disclose to whom it has disseminated, sold or transferred the biometric data; an order requiring it to disclose the standard of care it employed to protect the data; and an order enjoining it from future violations.
Church Mutual notes in its complaint that Stillwater’s insurance coverage has a claim limit of $1 million and an aggregate limit of $3 million. The policies exclude cyber liability, access or disclosure of confidential or personal information and data-related liability, and the recording and distributing of material or information in violation of law.
Church Mutual argues that Stillwater is not entitled to insurance coverage in Allen’s litigation under any of the policies and claims a controversy exists between the parties with respect to coverage.
Church Mutual seeks declaratory judgment that there is no coverage with respect to the claims articulated in the underlying lawsuit and that Church Mutual has no duty to defend and no duty to indemnify Stillwater.
“Declaratory relief will resolve the dispute between the parties regarding the issues related to coverage under the policies for the underlying claims articulated in the underlying lawsuit,” the suit states.
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois case number 3:21-cv-1022