In a recent feature by The Am Law Litigation Daily, Partners Carol C. Villegas and Michael P. Canty reflected on the decisive courtroom strategy that secured a historic jury verdict against Meta Platforms, Inc., a defining moment in the advancement of consumer protection and data privacy law.

As lead trial counsel, Carol and Mike were charged with proving Meta violated the California Invasion of Privacy Act through the unauthorized collection of user health data entered into the Flo Health app without its users’ consent.  The duo discussed how they developed their trial strategy, including how they approached presenting the case to a jury. “’It just comes back to that basic concept: Present to the jury the evidence that you have that makes out the elements of the claim.  No more.  No less.  And I think we did that,’” Michael explains.

The Am Law Litigation Daily notes that the Flo Health case is not the Firm’s first foray into consumer protection and data privacy, noting the $650 million class-action settlement against Facebook and active litigations against Amazon and PowerSchool as key examples where the Firm is helping hold corporations accountable for their handling of sensitive user data.  On the Firm’s decision to pursue certain matters, Carol expresses that Labaton seeks out cases with a “plus factor.”  “We look for opportunities where we see real egregious behavior, and we look to kind of deploy the resources that we have at Labaton to see if we can effect some change."

At the end of the two-week trial, which brought forth the powerful testimonies of five courageous women, the jury unanimously decided that Meta knowingly recorded and exploited sensitive women’s health data in violation of California privacy laws.  The article highlights that, although Meta’s lawyers contended at trial that Meta had not asked for user information from Flo Health and couldn’t read the information it received, “ the plaintiffs’ team was able to present evidence that the first thing Meta did with the information once it was in hand was try to connect it with a known Facebook user—something he said the company was able to do 34 million times.”

Carol notes that the testimonies of the plaintiffs were instrumental in proving the case: “it was ‘really compelling’ on that front for the jury to hear directly from the plaintiffs—women at different stages in their lives, from a young teenage girl to a woman in menopause. Could you imagine getting in front of a room of 100 people and talking about your period with strangers?” Carol added.  “This is what these women did in order to be able to convey to the jury how their privacy was violated.  I have such a tremendous amount of respect for them.”

The case not only stands as one of the first times a jury has ever held Big Tech accountable for its handling of consumer health information but also sends an important message about data privacy in the digital age and underscores Labaton’s deep commitment to safeguarding individual rights.