M.D. La. · No. 3:26-cv-01250
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ford Motor Companysource ↗ filed by Duck Law Firm · Judge Shelly Deckert Dick · No. 3:26-cv-01250 · 15:2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $59.50M–$725M ▾Wiretap/privacy claims split in recent rulings: Rand v. Eyemart Express (5th Cir.) revived Wiretap Act claims over tracking-tech data disclosure, while Santoro v. Tower Health (3rd Cir.) affirmed dismissal of nearly identical Meta Pixel/health-data claims. Outcome likely turns on specificity of data-sharing allegations and consent facts. Comparable settlements $59.50M–$725M median $115M · n=10 Meta $725M · Google $425M · Apple $250M 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. revived Wiretap Act claims for undisclosed data sharing via tracking tech, closest factual analog to Ford's alleged data practices. Main risk: Dismissal on consent/causation grounds as in Santoro v. Tower Health, where similar pixel/tracking claims were dismissed with prejudice after repeated pleading failures. This defendant: Ford already faces a parallel Firmin v. Ford Motor Company (Privacy & Wiretap) filing, suggesting recurring exposure on this theory. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $1.50M–$60M Small, heterogeneous comparable set (n=2 realized per-member data) and early-stage filing make this a rough directional estimate, not a precise forecast. · grounded in 10 rulings, 10 settlements, 4 verdicts | Filing | Privacy & Wiretap | M.D. La. | 2026-11-05 | $59.50M–$725M comparable settlements |