Casie D. Collignon

Experience

Privacy Class Action

• Successfully achieved full dismissal, with prejudice, of a data breach class action against the University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center involving 1.2M patients. See Beeman et al. v. Regents of the University of New Mexico, D-101-CV-2021-02049. The dismissal order focused on the University’s sovereign immunity and concluded that personal health information does not qualify as a tangible property interest for immunity purposes under New Mexico state law.
• Successfully dismissed Scripps Health from all federal court cases following a ransomware attack based on lack of CAFA jurisdiction where there were approximately 96% mailing addresses in California. See In re: Scripps Health Data Sec. Breach Litig., Case No.: 21cv1135-GPC(MSB), 2022 WL 228797, at *1 (S.D. Cal. Jan. 26, 2022). Casie currently represents Scripps Health against claims ranging from a violation of the CMIA and the CRA to negligence in the remaining six state court cases in San Diego County Superior Court, where she successfully achieved consolidation, with an order that refused to consolidate any additionally filed cases.
• Successfully defeated a CAFA home state exemption challenge to keep a large Florida academic medical institution in its preferred federal court forum following a data incident, despite over 85% mailing addresses in Florida. Casie successfully argued that mailing addresses are not dispositive of citizenship, the court could not use undeliverable addresses from the incident notification as evidence of Florida residency, many of the deliverable addresses were intrinsically transitory (nursing homes, homeless shelters, universities, etc.) and therefore there was no evidence of citizenship without individual inquiry into each putative class members’ citizenship.
• Successfully achieved dismissal of multiple class action lawsuits against a technology application company in multiple data breach lawsuits alleging that plaintiffs’ payment card and personal information was stolen and misused through online customer support services. The plaintiffs filed three separate lawsuits asserting claims in California and Georgia courts for violation of California’s Unfair Competition Laws, the Computer Fraud Act, the Stored Communication Act, negligence, breach of implied contract, negligence per se, and unjust enrichment. Successfully defeated all three actions, one on the basis of the first filed doctrine and two on the merits after motions to dismiss. Successfully blocked discovery at all phases of the cases to date. Two dismissals were affirmed on appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
• Successfully achieved dismissal of case against the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center and Cleveland Clinic in a putative class action brought against Facebook and various hospital systems and healthcare-related institutions that alleged certain healthcare institutions violated state and federal laws by transmitting information about consumers’ online browsing history to Facebook.
• Obtained, with prejudice, dismissal of a nationwide class action against an electronics and video game retailer alleging that customers’ personal information was shared with Facebook in violation of the client’s privacy policy. Defended the dismissal in the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, which resulted in the conclusion that the plaintiff failed to support his claims. Carlsen v. GameStop, 833 F.3d 903 (8th Cir. 2016). The decision was particularly important for the industry because it addressed interpretation of privacy policies as a basis for consumer class action claims involving the use and transfer of customer data, which is a growing area of concern and potential litigation.
• Successfully obtained summary judgment in favor of Sutherland Healthcare Solutions, Inc., a healthcare billing services provider, in a putative class action seeking nearly $400 million in statutory damages under the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act arising out of the theft of eight computers.
• Obtained, with prejudice, dismissal of a nationwide putative class action lawsuit filed in Nevada federal court against Envision Healthcare Corporation, which alleged claims stemming from a phishing attack on Envision’s systems. The decision clarified the pleading standard for damages in the data breach-context under Rule 12(b)(6). Additionally, prevailed on a motion to stay discovery pending the court’s ruling on the motion to dismiss. Pruchnicki v. Envision Healthcare Corp., 439 F.Supp.3d 1226 (D. Nev. 2020).
• Obtained dismissals in the U.S. District Courts for the Northern District of California and Southern District of Florida for lack of personal jurisdiction of a nationwide putative class action lawsuit against Mediant Communications Inc., which alleged claims stemming from an attack on several of Mediant’s business e-mail accounts. The decision confirmed that a data breach’s impact on a state’s residents, standing alone, cannot confer personal jurisdiction over an allegedly negligent data host, even where tens of thousands of such residents may have been impacted. Toretto v. Mediant Commc’ns, Inc., No. 19-CV-05208-EMC, 2020 WL 1288478, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 18, 2020). /li>
• Successfully achieved favorable early settlement for developer and publisher of large-scale gaming applications following suit commenced in Arkansas state court stating claim for intrusion upon seclusion based on allegation that the developer had embedded software development kits (SDKs) into its applications to collect and monitor child user’s information for use in targeted advertising and for profit. Following removal to the Western District of Arkansas and arguments that Plaintiff’s complaint should be dismissed for, among other reasons, lack of personal jurisdiction, failure to state a claim and preemption under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), the parties reached a favorable individual settlement.

Consumer Class Action

• Won appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in automobile insurance case concerning whether automobile liability insurance limits can be “stacked” or multiplied by the number of insured vehicles when only one is involved in an accident. The Ninth Circuit affirmed below victory on summary judgment granted by the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana in favor of the insurance company. Morris v. Estate of Bishop, No. 16-35973, 2019 WL 3961252, at *1 (9th Cir. Aug. 22, 2019) affirming Morris v. Estate of Bishop, No. CV 16-6-BU-SEH, 2016 WL 6534180, at *1 (D. Mont. Nov. 2, 2016).
• Successfully achieved complete dismissal of claims against Progressive Insurance in a putative class action wherein plaintiff alleged that Progressive's settlement offers constituted "amounts not in dispute" even though he had rejected the offers. Upon successfully removing the case to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois, the team filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that settlement offers cannot be deemed "undisputed amounts" and that the plaintiff's theory ran counter to Illinois laws, the Federal Rule of Evidence 408 and principles contract. Laures v. Progressive Cas. Ins. Co., No. 20-CV-1047-SMY, 2022 WL 4778000 (S.D. Ill. Oct. 2, 2022).
• Secured an important appellate victory on an issue of first impression on behalf of an insurance company when the court upheld arguments laid out in brief arguing that the trial court committed a reversible error in denying the client the right to intervene in the trial court case, subjecting it to a multimillion-dollar exposure. This case was of great importance to the insurance industry because, as collusive agreements become more popular, insurance companies’ right to intervene to protect their interests in subsequent bad-faith litigation is more important than ever.
• Played crucial liaison role in putative nationwide plaintiff and defendant class action alleging consumer, antitrust and RICO claims against more than 100 property and casualty insurers. Worked with more than 100 defense counsel to organize a coordinated defense strategy for dismissal of all claims.
• Successfully defeated class certification in multimillion-dollar consumer class action against major auto insurance company in Colorado state court. Victory had significant implications for the auto insurance industry and class action jurisprudence in Colorado. Allegations regarding the insurance company's marketing of its uninsured motorist product were filed against nearly every insurance company doing business in the state of Colorado. Subsequent to the new, higher Colorado standard, litigated one of the first class certification hearings of the sued insurers and achieved one of the first class certification victories for the insurance company, which set the stage for nearly every other insurance company in the state with similar lawsuits pending against it. In the wake of other landmark decisions, the Colorado Supreme Court adopted more liberal standards for class certification than the U.S. Supreme Court.
• Successfully dismissed class action lawsuit in multimillion-dollar ERISA breach of fiduciary duty lawsuit in North Dakota federal court against one of the largest hotel chain owners in the U.S. Case was of particular importance due to strategy of waiting until class was certified to bring a dispositive motion so that the motion would be preclusive to the entire class. Claims were dismissed with prejudice without leave to amend.
• Successfully defeated class certification in multimillion-dollar consumer class action against major auto insurance company in California state court. Victory came in the aftermath of California's Proposition 64, which significantly changed the landscape for standing and predominance requirements for California's proposed class representatives. Navigated court system that was dealing with significant change in class action law and leveraged timing of law change into victory for the insurance company.
• Successfully dismissed class action lawsuit in multimillion-dollar consumer class action against a major insurance company in Montana federal court. Victory leveraged significant differences between Montana state and federal law.
• Played crucial role in achieving early class action settlement for major auto insurance company in federal court in Kentucky. After settlement, the plaintiffs successfully certified class against the remaining defendants, and certification order was upheld by Sixth Circuit.
• Successfully achieved early class action settlement for major auto insurance company in New Mexico state court, while other insurance companies continue to litigate the issues within federal court in New Mexico.
• Provided key contributions in amicus briefs filed to U.S. Supreme Court seminal class decisions in Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, No. 11-864 (2013); Standard Fire v. Knowles, No. 11-1450 (2013); and Jacobsen v. Allstate, No. 19-976 (2014).

Commercial Litigation

• Successfully petitioned for en banc review to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals resulting in the published opinion of Hydro Resources, Inc. v. U.S. E.P.A., 608 F.3d 1131 (10th Cir. 2010) in a case involving uranium mining, EPA permits, and Indian country in New Mexico.
• Successfully litigated oil and gas lease dispute, including negotiation of a new oil and gas lease that was more financially beneficial to the client in a Wyoming state court dispute.
• Successfully defended financial services company in a partition trial, securing lien priority and preventing unfavorable foreclosure of property.
• Defends financial services companies, lenders, assignees, and assignors in litigation in federal and state courts regarding lien priority, partition, quiet title, and fraud allegations. In these engagements, successful litigation strategy is often related to timing of the allegations in the market, fact sensitivity and business considerations for the client. 

Memberships

• American Bar Association
• Colorado Bar Association
  • Class Actions, Derivative Suits and Mass Torts Subsection: Chair
• Denver Bar Association
  • Young Lawyers Division: Former President
  • Volunteer Lawyer of the Year Award (2007)

Community

• Denver Urban Debate League: Co-Founding Board Member

Pro Bono

• Co-led a team in conjunction with the ACLU and secured a $375,000 settlement for two victims of wrongful arrest in a drug sting. Clients were wrongly arrested and prosecuted based on false accusations, leading to the loss of their jobs and subsequent eviction from federally subsidized housing. 
• Was instrumental in representing, in conjunction with the ACLU, proposed class of prisoners in case alleging prisoner abuse in Colorado state court. Was primary litigator in court-involved settlement which led to new safety standards and abolishment of certain types of torture devices.