Fingerprint Case Reinstated
Close
 

Fingerprint Case Reinstated

A customer sued a tanning salon alleging it violated Illinois’s Biometric Information Privacy Act (Act) by collecting her fingerprints without providing the statutorily required disclosure concerning its retention policy and other topics, and by disclosing her fingerprints to an out-of-state third-party vendor. The trial court dismissed the case, and the appellate court reversed. Pursuant to plain language of the Act and its legislative history and purpose, the plaintiff was a person aggrieved. The court found plaintiff’s mental anguish and disclosure to a third party vendor alleged in the complaint constitute injuries or adverse effects. The Act does not require a harm in addition to a violation of the Act in order to file suit.

Sekura v Krishna Schaumburg Tan