W.D. Pa. · No. 2:26-cv-02211
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ACADIA HEALTHCARE COMPANY INC.source ↗ filed by Kimmel & Silverman, PC · No. 2:26-cv-02211 · 28:1332 Diversity-Other · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $59.50M–$725M ▾Privacy/wiretap claims tied to tracking tech show split outcomes: Doe v. Bayhealth and Gunnar Optiks survived pleading-stage challenges, while Santoro v. Tower Health and Cisneros v. Nuance were dismissed on exclusion or pleading grounds. Acadia's behavioral-health patient data raises similar pixel/wiretap exposure but outcome is fact-dependent. Comparable settlements $59.50M–$725M median $81.50M · n=10 Meta $725M · Google $425M · Google $135M Per member (realized): ~$29 median · $29–$29 (n=2) Comparable verdict: Google LLC $425.70M · Google LLC $425.65M Key precedent: Doe v. Bayhealth Medical Ctr. — healthcare provider's duty of confidentiality for tracking-tech disclosures survived MTD, closely mirroring Acadia's likely fact pattern. Main risk: Dismissal on statutory/exclusion grounds as in Santoro v. Tower Health, where Meta Pixel health-data claims failed despite similar factual theory. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $1.80M–$36M Small comparable set, no prior Acadia litigation data, and wide class-size uncertainty make this a rough directional estimate only. · grounded in 9 rulings, 10 settlements, 4 verdicts | Filing | Privacy & Wiretap | W.D. Pa. | 2026-10-09 | $59.50M–$725M comparable settlements |