Illinois Supreme Court Offers Opinion on Ongoing Biometric Privacy Case in White Castle

See what’s clicking on FoxBusiness.com

The Illinois Supreme Court on Friday issued an opinion in an ongoing case against White Castle related to the state’s Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) that could potentially result in massive fines.

The opinion came after the US Circuit Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit requested that the state’s highest court confirm whether BIPA claims are cumulative with each biometric data scan or transmission allegedly in violation of the law, or only in the first instance . The Illinois Supreme Court’s verdict was 4:3.

WHITE CASTLE HIRES ROBOTS TO ‘GIVE THE RIGHT TOOLS’ TO SERVE MORE ‘HOT AND DELICIOUS FOOD’: VP

In the proposed class-action lawsuit, plaintiff sued White Castle over allegations that the fast-food chain “unlawfully collected her biometrics and unlawfully shared her data with its third-party vendor” without her consent for several years after implementing fingerprint scanning for Loud the Illinois Supreme Court document restricting employee computer access.

NEW YORK, NY – APRIL 12: An exterior view of a White Castle restaurant, April 12, 2018 in the borough of Queens in New York City. White Castle introduced the meatless Impossible Slider burger. The burgers, which sell for $1.99, are about twice as much… (Drew Angerer/Getty Images/Getty Images)

“We conclude that the plain language of sections 15(b) and 15(d) shows that any scan or transmission of biometric identifiers or biometric information without prior consent creates a claim under the law,” the colonel said Illinois Court of Justice on Friday verdict.

In a statement, White Castle told FOX Business it was “deeply disappointed by the court’s decision and the significant business disruption being inflicted on Illinois businesses that may now be at risk of tremendous damage.”

“We are reviewing our options for seeking further judicial review given the strong dissenting opinion that included the Court’s Chief Justice,” the fast-food chain continued. “This dissent rightly raises serious concerns about today’s opinion.”

White Castle Restaurant (iStock / iStock)

Meanwhile, James Zouras, the attorney representing the plaintiff, told Portal that “hopefully today’s decision will encourage employers and other collectors of biometrics to finally take the law seriously.”

Facebook agrees to pay record $650 million to settle facial recognition lawsuit

Private facilities are from “collect[ing]conquer[ing]purchases[ing]receive[ing] obtained through trade or otherwise[ing]“the biometric data of an individual without first obtaining informed consent under BIPA. The law also imposes restrictions on them,” revealed[ing]disclosed[ing]or otherwise disseminate[ing]” such data without consent, among other provisions.

Negligent violations are subject to fines of up to US$1,000 under state law. Penalties for intentional or negligent violations are $5,000 each.

White Castle asserted that alleged claims “can arise only once – when the biometric data is first collected or disclosed,” according to the majority opinion.

White castle empty boxes (iStock)

“It will lead to consequences that the legislature could not have intended,” argued Illinois Supreme Court Justice David Overstreet of the majority opinion in the dissent. “Moreover, the interpretation of the majority makes compliance with the law particularly burdensome for employers.”

GOOGLE SUED BY THE TEXA ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR ALLEGED BIOMETRIC VIOLATIONS

White Castle said the damage could be in excess of $17 billion “if the plaintiff succeeds and is allowed to assert its claims on behalf of up to 9,500 current and former White Castle employees,” according to the majority opinion.

The case is referred back to the lower court.