S.D.N.Y. · No. 1:26-cv-09324
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NBCUniversal Media LLCsource ↗ filed by Yagman PLLC · No. 1:26-cv-09324 · 28:1332oc Diversity-Other Contract · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $59.50M–$725M ▾Comparable rulings split roughly evenly: Rand v. Eyemart Express and Doe v. Bayhealth allowed privacy/wiretap claims via tracking tech to survive, while Santoro v. Tower Health and Nuance v. Olson-type exemptions led to dismissal. Outcome heavily depends on whether NBCUniversal's data-sharing practices (e.g., pixel/SDK trackers) are framed as health or biometric-adjacent data. Comparable settlements $59.50M–$725M median $81.50M · n=10 Meta $725M · Google $425M · Google LLC $135M Per member (realized): ~$29 median · $29–$29 (n=2) Comparable verdict: Google LLC $425.70M · Google LLC $425.65M Key precedent: Rand v. Eyemart Express (5th Cir.) - closely analogous Meta Pixel disclosure theory survived dismissal, showing viability of wiretap claims against media/consumer platforms. Main risk: Dismissal on exemption or lack of individualized harm, as in Santoro v. Tower Health and Nuance v. Olson where statutory carve-outs defeated similar tracking-based claims. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $40M–$720M Small, heterogeneous comparable set and uncertain class definition make this a rough directional estimate, not a precise forecast. · grounded in 10 rulings, 10 settlements, 4 verdicts | Filing | Privacy & Wiretap | S.D.N.Y. | 2026-10-24 | $59.50M–$725M comparable settlements |