S.D.N.Y. · No. 1:26-cv-08608
Full docket on CourtListener ↗
No federal docket timeline hydrated for this case yet (state-court settlements have no RECAP docket).
| Matter | Type | Practice area | Court | Date | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Endava plcsource ↗ filed by Block & Leviton LLP · No. 1:26-cv-08608 · 15:78m(a) Securities Exchange Act · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $59.50M–$725M ▾Comparable rulings split: Tower Health's Meta Pixel claim was dismissed with prejudice, while Bayhealth's confidentiality claim and Gunnar Optiks' BIPA claim survived/were remanded. Endava is a B2B IT consultancy, not a consumer platform, making precedent fit imperfect and class size uncertain. Comparable settlements $59.50M–$725M median $81.50M · n=10 Meta $725M · Google $425M · Google LLC $135M Per member (realized): ~$29 median · $29–$100 (n=3) Comparable verdict: Google LLC $425.70M · Google LLC $425.65M Key precedent: Patrick Santoro v. Tower Health (3rd Cir.) - dismissed tracking-tech privacy claim, most analogous if Endava's exposure stems from website pixel/tracking tech. Main risk: Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal akin to Tower Health, especially absent a fiduciary/confidentiality relationship like healthcare defendants in Bayhealth/Integris. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $580K–$30M Endava's B2B profile diverges sharply from consumer-tech comparables, so class size and recovery figures are highly speculative with wide error bars. · grounded in 9 rulings, 10 settlements, 4 verdicts | Filing | Privacy & Wiretap | S.D.N.Y. | 2026-09-30 | $59.50M–$725M comparable settlements |