Attorney Articles
Claims Journal Features Bortnick and Michaud Article on Subrogation After Cyber Breaches: Lessons from Axis and Travelers
April 17, 2026 - Claims Journal
Once an inconvenient afterthought, cybersecurity has catapulted to the forefront of business plans, legislative acts and federal regulations as companies and governmental entities deepen their presence and investment in the complex and changing digital landscape.
Wilson Elser places a high premium on taking proactive steps designed to prevent or forestall cyber-events − whether maliciously intended or accidental − taking into account all manner of actors, including nation-states, criminal entities, terrorists, “hacktivists” and well-meaning employees. As the situation dictates, we consider underlying intent and the various methods each employs, including denial of service, destruction, ransomware and theft. We carefully monitor trends and changes to cyber “attack vectors” including social engineering, helping to ensure that our clients’ risk management guidelines are up to date, practical and effective.
With respect to risk management, our practice attorneys routinely:
Decisions made immediately following a data breach can significantly impact outcomes. For well over a decade, Wilson Elser’s core team of talented partners, assisted by associates and paralegals, has handled breach response and other sensitive situations arising from the misuse of computers and related technology. We understand that data intrusions – real and perceived – require decisive and appropriate action.
Following reports of a breach, our practice team members begin a “triage” process designed to immediately reduce exposure. Every breach has a distinctive set of characteristics and surrounding circumstances. Our experience allows us to respond swiftly and categorically to each.
We regularly oversee forensic analyses, engaging experts specially chosen to enhance protection of privileged and confidential communications, determine the cause of the breach and identify what data was at risk. Results guide the implementation of measures designed to comply with legal obligations and prevent additional data intrusion.
Depending on the situation, we can pursue other protective steps, such as:
Class actions are increasing in complexity, especially in the cyber space. Cases are becoming more duplicative and overlapping, with motions filed in multiple jurisdictions during the same time period.
With its national network of offices, Wilson Elser is well positioned to launch a coordinated multi-front defense in these situations. Our attorneys are experienced in simplifying the most complicated cases by bringing motions either for federal multidistrict consolidation or state and federal coordination. Class actions can quickly move from distracting to unmanageable to crippling – or worse – so our attorneys work diligently across disciplines to counter these claims, in many cases obtaining early dismissals of the named plaintiffs or defeating motions for class certification.
Our strategies for defending class action litigation are varied and are developed to be individualized in keeping with our clients’ objectives. Examples of these strategies include:
We also have experience conducting class- and merit-based discovery, pursuing interlocutory appeals of certification rulings and administering class action settlements.
Wilson Elser maintains a national team of experienced insurance attorneys who serve as coverage and monitoring counsel for carriers handling cyber-related claims under cyber liability and technology/media/advertising policies as well as traditional (non-cyber) policies, including commercial general liability, property, directors & officers, and errors & omissions. Our attorneys also routinely:
With arguably more senior litigating partner years than any other law firm in the United States, our litigators handle the most challenging and technical cyber cases. We sort through the complex technical and legal issues that characterize this practice, often serving as defense or coverage counsel on matters such as:
In the context of data security and privacy incidents, we routinely represent clients in connection with related government investigations commenced by various state and federal authorities and agencies, including state attorneys general, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Civil Rights, the Internal Revenue Service, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, among others.
We seek cost-effective results for our clients through early assessment and negotiations, alternative dispute resolution methods or summary judgment motions. When early resolutions are not possible, we have the skill and experience to resolve cases in court. In fact, we count among our ranks some of the finest trial attorneys in the country.
Should a matter present as a class action, our team is armed with the experience to mount a vigorous defense in state or federal court. Class actions can quickly move from distracting to unmanageable to crippling − or worse − so our attorneys work diligently across disciplines to counter these claims, in many cases obtaining early dismissals of the named plaintiffs or defeating motions for class certification.
Wilson Elser’s multidisciplinary Data Use & AI Governance attorneys partner with clients to develop, implement, and defend robust AI risk management programs that meet evolving legislative mandates and stakeholder expectations. Leveraging deep experience in intellectual property, technology, cybersecurity, employment, product liability, and class-action defense, we routinely counsel boards, business owners, product managers, and in-house counsel on how best to translate emerging AI statutes, standards, and risk management frameworks into practical policies and controls to satisfy regulators, investors, and consumers.
Our national platform and extensive network of specialists position us to guide proactive compliance initiatives from inception and to respond quickly when disputes arise. Indeed, team attorneys bring a proven record of success defending complex, high-stakes AI-related claims across industries and jurisdictions.
Our integrated capabilities include:
While most small and mid-sized organizations do not have dedicated privacy officers, their risks associated with data breaches and the need to comply with privacy laws are no less important. Indeed, they may even be greater if a smaller organization’s IT systems are not consistently updated or subject to the base designs of bad actors. A smaller-scale business model also may be less likely to withstand the outsized costs associated with breach-related liabilities and sanctions.
Wilson Elser is pleased to offer these clients a full suite of Virtual Privacy Officer Services that can be customized to fit an organization’s distinct cybersecurity and data privacy requirements. We engage on a continuous or as-needed basis in any number of jurisdictions – across the United States or worldwide.
Drawing on collective decades of related experience, our practice attorneys offer a wide range of cybersecurity and data privacy services, including:
Once an inconvenient afterthought, cybersecurity has catapulted to the forefront of business plans, legislative acts and federal regulations as companies and governmental entities deepen their presence and investment in the complex and changing digital landscape.
Daniel Coffman (Associate-Washington, DC), Anjali Das (Partner-Chicago, IL), David Ross (Partner-Washington, DC), Kim Viergever (Of Counsel-Denver, CO) and Ryan Williams (Partner-Denver, CO) obtained dismissal with prejudice of a federal data breach class action filed against a services vendor for mental health care providers in the District of Colorado. The case comprised eight consolidated class actions brought by 15 named plaintiffs that arose out of a ransomware incident that involved the personal information of almost 4.3 million individuals and included sensitive information such as health information and Social Security numbers. The court agreed that all of the named plaintiffs lack Article III standing, dissecting each of their alleged theories of harm and coming down on the side of the more reasoned courts that have found these types of theories fail to establish standing – public disclosure of private information, increased spam, diminution in value of PHI/PII, emotional distress and future harm. The court concluded that “Plaintiffs have failed to allege injuries in fact that are fairly traceable to the Defendants’ complained-of conduct,” and issued a judgment dismissing the plaintiffs’ claims with prejudice and closing the case.
Daniel R. Coffman, Anjali C. Das, David M. Ross, Kimberly Viergever and Ryan A. Williams
Anjali Das (Partner-Chicago, IL), Brian Myers (Of Counsel-Washington, DC) and Tommy Spitaletto (Partner-Dallas, TX) obtained dismissal of a data breach class action filed against a mental health care provider in the Western District of Texas. The lawsuit arose out of a cyber-attack that involved personal information that included sensitive information such as health information and Social Security numbers. In support of our client’s motion to dismiss, Wilson Elser argued that the plaintiff lacked Article III standing to sue because she failed to allege any injury-in-fact in the form of identity theft fraud, or misappropriation as a result of the breach. Instead, the plaintiff alleged that her harm consisted of (1) lost time and out-of-pocket expenses spent dealing with the data breach; (2) diminished value of her personal, health and financial information; (3) anxiety; (4) violation of privacy rights; (5) loss of the benefit of the bargain made with our client and overpayment for services intended to include data security; and (6) increased risk of future fraud and identity theft. The District Court agreed with Wilson Elser’s position that the plaintiff lacked standing to bring suit and dismissed the case on the basis that the plaintiff failed to allege any actual injury in the form of identity theft, financial fraud or misuse of personal information that could be traced to the cyber incident.
Anjali C. Das, Brian H. Myers and Thomas M. Spitaletto
Constantina Mirabile (Of Counsel-West Palm Beach, FL), Melissa Murphy-Petros (Of Counsel-Chicago, IL) and Anjali Das (Partner-Chicago, IL) represented an educational technology company that provides subscribers with access to online educational courses in a Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) class action filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The plaintiff, a subscriber, allegedly viewed online course content offered by our client, and filed a putative class action on behalf of herself and all other subscribers for violations of the VPPA. The plaintiff alleged that Meta Pixel (a snippet of JavaScript code that tracks visitor activity on a website) was installed on our client’s website, which resulted in the disclosure of her personal information to Facebook, including the content she viewed, without her consent. Wilson Elser filed a Motion to Compel Arbitration, noting that the plaintiff (like all subscribers) was required to accept defendant’s Terms of Use, which included a mandatory binding arbitration provision. Moreover, the Terms of Use explicitly stated that all parties waived the right to participate in a class action or representative proceeding with respect to any claim. The court promptly granted Wilson Elser’s motion pursuant to the Terms of Service agreement. The ruling underscores the importance of arbitration and class action waiver language in Terms of Use agreements.
NOTE: The Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA), enacted in 1998, sought to preserve personal privacy with respect to the rental, purchase or delivery of video tapes or similar audio visual materials. Plaintiffs have sought to resuscitate the statute by bringing VPPA claims into the 21st century based on the premise that organizations that offer prerecorded, online audio visual content are “video tape service providers” within the meaning of the statute, the draw being VPPA class actions include statutory damages of up to $2,500 per violation.
Melissa A. Murphy-Petros and Anjali C. Das
Geoffrey A. Belzer (Partner-Chicago), Anjali C. Das (Partner-Chicago), Peter J. Larkin (Partner-White Plains) and Jennifer S. Stegmaier (Of Counsel-Chicago) obtained a data breach class action dismissal in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of a radiology facility and archival imaging system that contained protected health information. About a year and a half after receiving notice of a breach, two patients filed a complaint against the firm’s client and its IT service provider for failing to implement adequate cybersecurity measures, alleging multiple unauthorized individuals had accessed their information. Geoffrey, Anjali, Peter and Jennifer prevailed on their motion to dismiss when the court held that allegations of increased risk of future harm alone is not a cognizable injury. The court also rejected each of the plaintiffs' additional theories of injury based on time and money spent on theft and fraud monitoring, “benefit of the bargain” injury, intrusion upon seclusion and statutory violations. Plaintiff’s counsel initially filed a purported class action designating another individual who was ultimately determined to never have been a patient of the radiology practice. Plaintiff’s counsel dismissed that action after the team moved for dismissal, and counsel then instituted the parallel suit involving these two plaintiffs and the motion to dismiss follows.
Geoffrey Belzer, Anjali C. Das, Peter J. Larkin and Jennifer S. Stegmaier
Once an inconvenient afterthought, cybersecurity has catapulted to the forefront of business plans, legislative acts and federal regulations as companies and governmental entities deepen their presence and investment in the complex and changing digital landscape.
Once an inconvenient afterthought, cybersecurity has catapulted to the forefront of business plans, legislative acts and federal regulations as companies and governmental entities deepen their presence and investment in the complex and changing digital landscape.
Once an inconvenient afterthought, cybersecurity has catapulted to the forefront of business plans, legislative acts and federal regulations as companies and governmental entities deepen their presence and investment in the complex and changing digital landscape.
Once an inconvenient afterthought, cybersecurity has catapulted to the forefront of business plans, legislative acts and federal regulations as companies and governmental entities deepen their presence and investment in the complex and changing digital landscape.