In re Hannaford Bros. Co. Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, 2010 ME 93

4 A.3d 492 (Me. 2010) · Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · September 21, 2010 · No. Fed-09-586

Summary

The Supreme Judicial Court of Maine answered a certified question concerning whether time and effort spent responding to or preventing harm from a customer data breach constitute a cognizable injury under negligence or implied-contract theories. The court held that time and effort alone, absent physical harm, economic loss, or identity theft, are not recoverable injuries under Maine law. The court did not address the second certified question regarding the economic loss doctrine.

Holdings

  1. Time and effort alone, absent a corresponding loss of earnings or earning opportunities arising from personal injury or property damage, is not a cognizable injury recoverable in negligence under Maine law.
  2. Time and effort alone, characterized as ordinary frustrations and inconveniences, is not a cognizable injury recoverable for breach of implied contract under Maine law.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether, absent physical harm, economic loss, or identity theft, time and effort spent reasonably avoiding or remediating reasonably foreseeable harm constitute a cognizable injury recoverable under Maine negligence or implied-contract law.
  2. Whether a plaintiff may recover for purely economic harm under Maine negligence law absent personal injury, physical harm to property, or misrepresentation, if time and effort alone constitutes a cognizable injury.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (23)

  • Estate of Cilley v. Lane, 2009 ME 133, ¶ 10, 985 A.2d 481, 485(followed)
  • Maine Energy Recovery Co. v. United Steel Structures, Inc., 1999 ME 31, ¶ 7, 724 A.2d 1248, 1250(followed)
  • Snow v. Villacci, 2000 ME 127, ¶¶ 9-12, 754 A.2d 360, 363-64(followed)
  • Fotter v. Butler, 145 Me. 266, 272, 75 A.2d 160, 163 (1950)(followed)
  • Walters v. Petrolane-Northeast Gas Service, Inc., 425 A.2d 968, 973-74 (Me. 1981)(followed)
  • Walter v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 2000 ME 63, ¶ 24, 748 A.2d 961, 970(followed)
  • Marchesseault v. Jackson, 611 A.2d 95, 99 (Me. 1992)(followed)
  • Craddock v. Jones, 143 So. 529, 531 (La. Ct. App. 1932)(distinguished)
  • McDonald v. North, 47 Barb. 530 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1867)(distinguished)
  • Bennett v. Lockwood & Carter, 20 Wend. 223, 224 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1838)(distinguished)

Showing top 10 of 23.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…