← Records

Ambrosia v. Phreesia, Inc.

N.D. Ill. · No. 1:26-cv-12754

Full docket on CourtListener ↗

No federal docket timeline hydrated for this case yet (state-court settlements have no RECAP docket).

Our records for this case (1)

MatterTypePractice areaCourtDateValue
Phreesia, Inc.source ↗
filed by Hedin LLP · No. 1:26-cv-12754 · Civil Miscellaneous Case · view case timeline →
Comparable settlements $59.50M–$725M ▾
Analogous healthcare tracking-tech claims split: Doe v. Bayhealth survived a breach-of-confidentiality theory, while Santoro v. Tower Health (Meta Pixel, healthcare context) was dismissed with prejudice; Doe v. Integris Health left state privacy claims unresolved after remand.
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 duty of confidentiality for tracking-tech disclosures closely mirrors Phreesia's patient-facing intake platform.
Main risk: Santoro v. Tower Health dismissal shows healthcare pixel/tracking claims can fail decisively on pleading and causation grounds, especially with delay in amendment.
Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $2M–$70M
No Phreesia-specific rulings exist; estimate relies on analogous healthcare-tracking cases and unresolved class-size data. · grounded in 9 rulings, 10 settlements, 4 verdicts
FilingPrivacy & WiretapN.D. Ill.2026-10-18$59.50M–$725M
comparable settlements