Suit accuses LexisNexis of violating Daniel's Law by failing to shield cops' personal data

Kathleen Hopkins, Asbury Park Press
·4 min read

A class action lawsuit filed this week on behalf of thousands of law enforcement officers in New Jersey accuses global data broker LexisNexis of retaliating against them for requesting that their personal information be shielded from disclosure under "Daniel's Law.''

The lawsuit, filed Monday in Bergen County Superior Court against LexisNexis Risk Data Management, LLC, and unknown individuals and companies, accuses the data broker of placing unauthorized credit report freezes on law enforcement officers and other covered individuals who requested protection under the law designed to shield their personal information from those who would potentially seek to harm them.

"Daniel's Law'' was enacted in New Jersey in November 2020, four months after 20-year-old Daniel Anderl was shot dead and his father seriously wounded by a gunman targeting his mother, federal criminal Judge Esther Salas. The gunman went to the family's Middlesex County home posing as a delivery person and killed himself after shooting the victims.

The state law, which became a model for a subsequent federal law, prohibits online data brokers from selling, publishing and distributing the names, addresses and unpublished home telephone numbers of current and former judges, law enforcement officers and prosecutors, upon any written request by a covered person.

Kara Grady, a spokeswoman for LexisNexis, said she could not comment on the pending lawsuit, but said, "We care deeply about the safety of judges, police and all covered persons under the federal and New Jersey's Daniel's Law and we act at all times to protect the dissemination of protected information.''

The class action lawsuit on behalf of about 18,000 plaintiffs alleges LexisNexis imposed the credit report freezes on eligible persons who asked that their home addresses and unlisted phone numbers not be disclosed. In addition to retaliating against the covered persons for making the requests, the company continued to release their personal information to its customers, the lawsuit alleges.

LexisNexis also retaliated against those who requested the protection by falsely reporting they had been victims of identity theft, the lawsuit alleges.

In correspondence to the affected individuals, LexisNexis informed them the credit freezes could  "delay, interfere with or prohibit the timely approval of applications you make for items such as credit, benefits or insurance underwriting,'' the suit said.

"You may be denied credit as a result of a freeze placed on your credit file,'' LexisNexis informed them, according to the suit.

And, when plaintiffs asked that the credit freezes be removed, their requests were ignored, the lawsuit alleges.

"Rather than fully comply with Daniel's Law as required, LexisNexis set into motion a campaign to freeze the credit reports of Plaintiffs and others, and in doing so, permanently mar their credit histories with alleged 'identity thefts' that never happened - doing so in retaliation for the efforts by Plaintiffs and others to exercise their rights under Daniel's Law," the suit said.

"LexisNexis openly acknowledged in their letters of retribution that this reporting of identity theft and credit freeze may result in Plaintiffs being denied crucial financial, insurance and. health services,'' said the lawsuit, filed by the Newark law firm Genova Burns.

"Although the law requires that a credit freeze be promptly lifted upon request, LexisNexis still has not done so,'' the suit said. "LexisNexis has engaged in a prolonged effort to thwart Plaintiffs' efforts to lift these credit freezes. Plaintiffs believe this is part of an unlawful effort by LexisNexis and others to punish and deter attempts to seek compliance with Daniel's Law, resulting in substantial and ongoing harm to Plaintiffs and others.''

LexisNexis has not yet filed a response to the suit.

Grady, the company spokeswoman, provided the following statement:"LexisNexis Risk Solutions takes privacy, security and permissible use very seriously. We understand and accept the responsibilities associated with safeguarding sensitive data. We diligently work with others in the industry to improve data safeguards and privacy protections. Our own security team works to continually refine our data protection processes to ensure availability, permissible use, confidentiality and integrity of data.''

An amendment to "Daniel's Law'' signed into law in 2023 provides awards for actual damages of not less than $1,000 for each violation, punitive damages and attorney's fees.

The lawsuit seeks such damages as well as court orders requiring the defendant to comply with New Jersey laws.

Kathleen Hopkins, a reporter in New Jersey since 1985, covers crime, court cases, legal issues and just about every major murder trial to hit Monmouth and Ocean counties. Contact her at khopkins@app.com.

In a taped statement released by Mercury LLC Public Affairs, U.S. District Judge Esther Salas honors the memory of her son, Daniel, and provides a brief update on the condition of her husband, Mark. She also addresses the lack of privacy afforded to federal judges as an issue that cannot be ignored..
In a taped statement released by Mercury LLC Public Affairs, U.S. District Judge Esther Salas honors the memory of her son, Daniel, and provides a brief update on the condition of her husband, Mark. She also addresses the lack of privacy afforded to federal judges as an issue that cannot be ignored..

This article originally appeared on Asbury Park Press: Lawsuit seeks to punish LexisNexis for disclosing cops' home addresses