{"id":189236,"date":"2026-02-20T15:04:00","date_gmt":"2026-02-20T20:04:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/2026\/02\/20\/floridas-renewed-push-for-cyber-litigation-reform-bradley-arant-boult-cummings-llp\/"},"modified":"2026-02-20T15:10:08","modified_gmt":"2026-02-20T20:10:08","slug":"floridas-renewed-push-for-cyber-litigation-reform-bradley-arant-boult-cummings-llp","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/2026\/02\/20\/floridas-renewed-push-for-cyber-litigation-reform-bradley-arant-boult-cummings-llp\/","title":{"rendered":"Florida\u2019s Renewed Push for Cyber Litigation Reform | Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP"},"content":{"rendered":"

Florida\u2019s Renewed Push for Cyber Litigation Reform | Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP<\/a><\/p>\n

https:\/\/www.jdsupra.com\/legalnews\/florida-s-renewed-push-for-cyber-1468855\/<\/a><\/p>\n

Publish Date: 2026-02-20 15:04:00<\/a><\/p>\n

Source Domain: www.jdsupra.com<\/a><\/p>\n

Author: <\/a><\/p>\n

Using an unordered list, summarize the following article with between 4 and 8 key points. <\/p>\n

Florida lawmakers are once again weighing whether to provide litigation protections to companies that invest in meaningful cybersecurity safeguards. A revised proposal now pending before the Florida Legislature seeks to strike a balance between encouraging proactive data security measures and preserving consumer remedies following a breach. Data incidents are commonly met with class action lawsuits filed on behalf of individuals alleging harm stemming from the unauthorized access, acquisition, or exposure of personal information. As a result, what begins as a criminal act against a business often evolves into a complex web of regulatory, reputational, and litigation challenges.<\/p>\n

A cyber incident, in and of itself, is not necessarily evidence of a breach of a duty to safeguard data. The unfortunate reality of our modern age means extremely secure entities may still be breached due to the evolving techniques of adversaries, both foreign and domestic. Even so, companies that experience cybersecurity incidents are often met with a wave of class action lawsuits in the aftermath. These complaints frequently rely on broadly framed allegations that the organization failed to implement or maintain \u201creasonable\u201d data security measures, often without regard to the specific safeguards that were in place or the evolving nature of cyber threats.<\/p>\n

Prompted by the escalating cost of these class action data breach litigations and the numerous headline-grabbing cyberattacks, particularly those in the healthcare industry, the Florida Legislature is once again pushing for cyber litigation reform that raises the liability standard for class action lawsuits arising from cybersecurity events.<\/p>\n

The 2024 Effort and Its Veto<\/p>\n

In 2024, the Florida Legislature passed House Bill 473, a measure designed to provide litigation protections to companies that suffer data breaches despite maintaining robust cybersecurity programs. The bill conditioned immunity on two primary requirements: compliance with Florida\u2019s data breach notification law and implementation of a cybersecurity program aligned with recognized industry frameworks or legal standards.<\/p>\n

The legislation was intended to address the growing wave of class action lawsuits filed in the wake of data incidents \u2014 many of which allege technical statutory violations even where companies have acted in good faith and maintained reasonable security controls. Proponents argued that offering a litigation presumption in favor of compliant businesses would incentivize stronger cybersecurity practices while helping mitigate the mounting costs of opportunistic breach litigation.<\/p>\n

Although the Legislature approved the bill in March 2024, Gov. Ron DeSantis vetoed it. In his veto message, the governor expressed concern that the proposed immunity could limit meaningful recourse for consumers harmed by data breaches. He encouraged stakeholders to continue working with the Florida Cybersecurity Advisory Council to develop a framework that protects both businesses and consumers. See our previous blog on House Bill 473 here.<\/p>\n

Senate Bill 635: A More Targeted Approach<\/p>\n

Two years later, lawmakers have returned with Senate Bill 635, a revised version that attempts to address the concerns raised in 2024 while preserving incentives for cybersecurity investment. Like its predecessor, SB 635 would provide a presumption against liability in certain class action lawsuits arising from cybersecurity incidents. However, the scope of the protection has been narrowed, and the standards have been heightened.<\/p>\n

Key provisions include:<\/p>\n

\tSubstantial Compliance Standard \u2013 Defendants must demonstrate \u201csubstantial compliance\u201d \u2014 not merely \u201csubstantial alignment\u201d \u2014 with standardized cybersecurity frameworks, such as from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the Center for Internet Security (CIS) Critical Security Controls, ISO\/IEC 27000, HITRUST CSF, SOC 2 Type 2, and\/or other similar industry frameworks or standards.
\n\tLimited to Class Actions \u2013 The presumption applies only to class action lawsuits. Individual plaintiffs would retain the ability to pursue damages, and the presumption would not apply in those individual cases.
\n\tGovernment-Specific Requirements \u2013 Government entities must maintain a disaster recovery plan to qualify for the presumption.
\n\tDefined Personal Information \u2013 The bill includes a specific definition of \u201cpersonal information,\u201d clarifying the scope of covered incidents.<\/p>\n

Under SB 635, private businesses and their third-party agents would be entitled to a presumption against liability in class action litigation if they substantially comply with the Florida Information Protection Act and implement cybersecurity policies consistent with recognized frameworks. The law aims to incentivize better, documented security practices rather than just penalizing breaches after they occur.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The bill also includes provisions offering complete liability protection to local governments in certain circumstances and restricts local governments from imposing heightened cybersecurity standards on IT vendors beyond those imposed on the governmental entity itself, subject to limited exceptions.<\/p>\n

Current Status and Implications<\/p>\n

On February 11, 2026, the Senate Committee on Governmental Oversight and Accountability advanced SB 635. The bill now awaits consideration by the Appropriations Committee. If enacted, the legislation could alter the cybersecurity litigation landscape in Florida. Supporters contend it would reduce cyber liability insurance costs, encourage stronger adherence to established security frameworks, and decrease the volume of class action litigation following data incidents.<\/p>\n

As cyber incidents remain a persistent operational risk across industries, Florida\u2019s renewed effort reflects a broader national debate: how to encourage meaningful cybersecurity investment without insulating companies from accountability. The outcome of SB 635 may signal how far states are willing to go in recalibrating that balance.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Florida\u2019s Renewed Push for Cyber Litigation Reform | Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP https:\/\/www.jdsupra.com\/legalnews\/florida-s-renewed-push-for-cyber-1468855\/ Publish…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":189237,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/jdsupra-static.s3.amazonaws.com\/profile-images\/og.13676_5142.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[15],"tags":[30,24,28],"class_list":["post-189236","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-cybersecurity","tag-breach","tag-cybersecurity","tag-data-security"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/189236"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=189236"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/189236\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":189238,"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/189236\/revisions\/189238"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/189237"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=189236"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=189236"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/testing.news-you-need.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=189236"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}