As part of our ongoing Captain Compliance privacy litigation series we strive to cover whats happening in the litigation space. Each month we cover a new law firm that is taking action and acting as a watchdog of consumer privacy in their area. This month we cover Kevin Tucker and the East End Trial Group who is expected to be Pennsylvania’s consumer advocacy lawyer for privacy litigation and ADA compliance suits.
Certain law firms have emerged as relentless advocates for consumer protection. While many businesses focus solely on growth and conversion optimization, a specialized group of consumer rights attorneys has made it their mission to hold companies accountable for privacy violations that harm everyday consumers and the best protection against these suits is to use a software such as Captain Compliance’s that can protect against privacy violations. Today we’re covering Pittsburgh’s East End Trial Group and its co-founder Kevin Tucker, who’s growing firm is placing them alongside other major players in privacy litigation like Tauler Smith LLP and Swigart Law Group—firms that are fundamentally reshaping how businesses approach data privacy and compliance.
Meet Kevin Tucker: Champion for Consumer Rights
Kevin Tucker co-founded East End Trial Group with Kevin Abramowicz, building a Pittsburgh-based firm dedicated to consumer protection, ADA compliance, and privacy rights. In 2023, Tucker received the ACHIEVA Award of Excellence in Legal Services for his extraordinary efforts on behalf of people with disabilities and their families.
Tucker has represented laborers across Pennsylvania, tried cases for inmates seeking adequate medical care, and represented groups of consumers and individuals with disabilities in litigation across the country. His work has earned remarkable praise from opposing counsel, with one defense attorney telling the court during a fairness hearing that Tucker represents the ideals of what it means to be an attorney and counselor of law.
Tucker was selected to Rising Stars from 2021 through 2025, a peer designation awarded only to a select number of accomplished attorneys in each state. Courts have appointed Tucker to represent settlement classes in multistate cases, including a right of publicity case involving people search websites that created settlement funds totaling over $10 million.
Beyond ADA: East End’s Privacy Work
While East End Trial Group has built a strong reputation for ADA compliance litigation—ensuring websites are accessible to people with disabilities—the firm also recognizes the critical intersection between accessibility and data privacy. Their work extends into areas that many businesses overlook until they receive a demand letter.
Internet Lenders and Arbitration Opt-Outs: A Hidden Consumer Trap
One of East End Trial Group’s notable practice areas involves protecting consumers from predatory lending practices, particularly around internet lenders and arbitration clauses. Many online lenders prohibit customers from filing lawsuits against them, instead requiring disputes to go through arbitration processes that can favor big companies.
The firm highlights a critical consumer protection issue: many online lenders offer a 30 or 60-day period when customers can opt out of arbitration clauses, but most consumers don’t even know this provision exists. This lack of awareness effectively strips consumers of their right to pursue legal remedies for unfair lending practices, hidden fees, and privacy violations.
East End Trial Group has helped consumers challenge practices by online lenders including Avant, Best Egg, Upgrade, Upstart, and Prosper—companies that offer convenient online funding but often bury consumer-unfriendly terms deep in their agreements.
The Privacy Connection: When consumers apply for loans online, they’re providing some of their most sensitive personal information—Social Security numbers, banking details, income information, and more. The intersection of predatory lending practices and data privacy creates significant risks. If consumers can’t sue when their data is mishandled because they’ve been locked into arbitration agreements, they have limited recourse for privacy breaches.
The California Privacy Litigation Powerhouses
While East End Trial Group operates primarily in Pennsylvania, it’s essential to understand the broader privacy litigation landscape, particularly in California—the epicenter of consumer privacy enforcement.
Tauler Smith LLP: Leading the Charge on Digital Privacy
Based in Los Angeles, Tauler Smith LLP has become one of the most aggressive firms pursuing privacy violations under California law. The firm’s attorneys regularly represent plaintiffs in data privacy claims and recently co-authored an article on strengthening California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) protections.
Their Focus Areas Include:
- California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) Claims: CIPA is a critically important California law that protects consumers’ data privacy rights by prohibiting companies from using tracking software to monitor and record website visitors. CIPA provides a private right of action, allowing individuals to sue companies directly for violations.
- Trap and Trace Device Litigation: Trap and Trace claims via Tauler Smith has won multiple pre-trial victories in trap and trace complaints, including cases against IHOP, Trane Technologies, and Rad Power Bikes, where companies allegedly used TikTok tracking code to deanonymize users.
- Meta Pixel Lawsuits: The firm has brought numerous cases against companies using Meta Pixel (Facebook Pixel) technology to track user behavior without proper consent, particularly in sensitive contexts like healthcare websites.
- Federal Wiretap Act Claims: The Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), including the Federal Wiretap Act, explicitly prohibits entities from intercepting online data without consent. Tauler Smith has successfully litigated cases where companies intercepted customer communications using embedded tracking code.
Tauler Smith sends out hundreds of demand letters monthly to registered agents and business addresses, and there are approximately eight other law firms waiting to file similar privacy claims for technology running on websites.
Swigart Law Group: The San Diego Privacy Enforcers
Swigart Law Group, led by Joshua B. Swigart, operates from San Diego and has built a formidable reputation in consumer protection and privacy law. Joshua Swigart has served as lead or co-lead counsel in dozens of class actions that have returned millions of dollars to consumers and shaped the development of consumer protection law.
Swigart’s Primary Litigation Areas:
- CIPA Enforcement: The firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for litigants over sixteen years, with a significant focus on privacy violations.
- Meta Pixel and Session Replay Cases: Swigart has brought notable cases on behalf of clients whose data was tracked via Meta Pixel while visiting medical provider websites, arguing that patients seeking information on sensitive health topics had their private data shared without permission.
- Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA): Beyond digital privacy, the firm enforces consumer rights against unlawful robocalls and text message spam.
- California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA): Swigart filed one of the early lawsuits under the CCPA against Epic Games for the Houseparty app, arguing that users didn’t receive proper disclosures or the opportunity to opt out of data sharing.
The Swigart Law Group is known for aggressively sending demand letters and initiating arbitration proceedings against companies using tracking technologies, often seeking statutory damages that can be substantial.
Pennsylvania’s WESCA: The East Coast Privacy Battleground
While California dominates privacy litigation headlines with CIPA, Pennsylvania has its own powerful weapon: the Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act (WESCA).
Understanding WESCA
Enacted in 1978 and amended over time, WESCA is one of the strictest wiretapping laws in the United States, requiring all-party consent for recording or intercepting communications—a standard shared by only 11 other states.
Unlike modern privacy laws like the CCPA, WESCA was not designed to regulate internet-based data collection, but recent judicial interpretations, particularly the Third Circuit’s 2022 decision in Popa v. Harriet Carter Gifts, Inc., have expanded its application to online tracking technologies, sparking a wave of class action lawsuits.
The Popa Decision: A Game-Changer
The Popa case fundamentally altered how WESCA applies to digital tracking. The Third Circuit determined that WESCA does not include a broad direct-party exception and that defendants could not avoid liability simply because a plaintiff’s browser communicated directly with a third party’s servers.
This means that when a website uses third-party tracking tools (like session replay software, analytics tools, or marketing pixels), both the website operator and the third-party service provider could potentially be liable under WESCA—even if the third party directly receives the communications.
WESCA vs. Federal Law
WESCA’s protections are broader than the federal Wiretap Act because it lacks a general direct party exemption and requires all-party consent. This creates a higher bar for compliance than federal law requires.
The Consent Defense: WESCA includes an all-party consent exception, under which it is not unlawful to intercept communications where all parties have given prior consent. The critical question in most WESCA litigation is whether consumers gave adequate consent—and whether website privacy policies provide sufficient notice to constitute implied consent.
Pennsylvania’s Unique Position
Pennsylvania lacks a comprehensive consumer data privacy law akin to the CCPA or Colorado Privacy Act. Instead, it relies on a patchwork of statutes, including WESCA, to address data privacy issues. This makes WESCA particularly attractive for plaintiffs’ attorneys because WESCA’s private right of action and statutory damages make it an attractive tool, especially in the absence of a dedicated internet privacy framework.
For East End Trial Group, operating in Pennsylvania means WESCA is a powerful tool in their arsenal for protecting consumers—and a significant risk for businesses that aren’t compliant.
The Technologies Under Fire
Understanding what triggers these lawsuits is crucial for any business operating online:
Session Replay Software
Tools like FullStory, Hotjar, and Lucky Orange record user sessions to help businesses understand user behavior. However, without proper disclosure and consent, this can constitute illegal interception under both CIPA and WESCA.
Marketing Pixels
The Meta Pixel (Facebook Pixel), TikTok Pixel, and similar tools send user data to third parties for advertising purposes. These are frequently targeted in privacy litigation, especially when used on healthcare, financial, or other sensitive websites.
Chat Bots and Live Chat Tools
Third-party chat solutions that record conversations or transmit data to external servers can trigger wiretapping claims if not properly disclosed.
Analytics and Tracking Tools
Even Google Analytics has faced scrutiny. Any tool that collects user behavior data and transmits it to a third party without clear consent can create liability.
The Financial Stakes: What Businesses Risk
The monetary exposure from privacy litigation is substantial:
- Statutory Damages: Under CIPA, plaintiffs can recover $5,000 per violation. Under WESCA, damages include actual damages plus punitive damages, and in some cases, criminal penalties apply.
- Class Action Exposure: A single plaintiff can represent thousands or millions of website visitors, creating astronomical potential damages.
- Attorney’s Fees: Privacy statutes typically allow prevailing plaintiffs to recover attorney’s fees, incentivizing litigation.
- Settlement Costs: Even businesses that believe they’re in the right often settle to avoid the cost and uncertainty of litigation. Settlement amounts vary widely but can range from tens of thousands to millions of dollars.
- Reputation Damage: Beyond monetary costs, privacy lawsuits damage consumer trust and brand reputation.
East End Trial Group and Why You Should Take Privacy Laws Seriously
The work of firms like East End Trial Group, Tauler Smith, and Swigart Law Group serves a critical function: forcing businesses to take privacy seriously. Here’s what every business needs to understand:
1. Privacy Policies Are Not Enough
Having a privacy policy doesn’t automatically create compliance or consent. The policy must:
- Be clearly visible and accessible before data collection occurs
- Accurately describe all tracking technologies and data sharing
- Use clear, plain language that consumers can understand
- Be regularly updated as technologies change
2. Consent Must Be Meaningful
Courts are increasingly skeptical of “implied consent” arguments. Best practices include:
- Affirmative opt-in mechanisms for tracking
- Clear disclosures about what data is collected and shared
- Easy-to-use tools for consumers to opt out
- Documented consent that can withstand legal scrutiny
3. Third-Party Tools Create Liability
Many businesses don’t realize that adding a simple tracking pixel or chat widget creates potential liability. Every third-party tool that collects or transmits user data should be:
- Evaluated for privacy implications
- Disclosed in your privacy policy
- Implemented with appropriate consent mechanisms
- Regularly audited for compliance
4. Location Matters
- Operating in California? CIPA applies, and firms like Tauler Smith and Swigart are actively monitoring compliance.
- Operating in Pennsylvania? WESCA creates stringent requirements, and East End Trial Group is there to enforce them.
- Operating nationally? You need to comply with the strictest applicable state laws—California and Pennsylvania chief among them.
5. ADA and Privacy Intersect
As East End Trial Group’s dual focus shows, ADA accessibility and privacy compliance often intersect. Accessible websites that don’t protect user privacy create double exposure. Conversely, privacy-compliant sites that aren’t accessible face ADA litigation.
Privacy Compliance Is No Longer Optional
The message from these law firms is clear: consumer privacy rights are being actively enforced, and businesses cannot afford to be complacent. The attorneys protecting consumers—Tucker, Swigart, and their peers—are sophisticated, well-resourced, and committed to holding companies accountable.
For businesses, the path forward requires:
- Comprehensive Privacy Audits: Identify every piece of technology that collects user data
- Proper Consent Management: Implement robust consent mechanisms that meet state law requirements
- Clear Disclosures: Ensure privacy policies and notices are accurate, accessible, and understandable
- Regular Monitoring: Privacy compliance isn’t one-and-done; it requires ongoing attention
- Expert Guidance: Work with privacy professionals who understand both the technical and legal landscapes
Consumer Protection in the Digital Age
The work of East End Trial Group and similar firms represents a crucial counterbalance to unchecked corporate data collection. In an era where personal data is often called “the new oil,” consumer rights attorneys serve as essential guardians of privacy rights.
Kevin Tucker’s recognition for his advocacy on behalf of people with disabilities reflects a broader commitment to protecting vulnerable populations. Similarly, the privacy litigation led by firms like Tauler Smith and Swigart protects consumers who often don’t realize their data is being collected and monetized without their knowledge or meaningful consent.
Lawyers Force You to Adapt or Face the Consequences
The privacy litigation landscape has fundamentally changed. What was once a theoretical risk is now a practical certainty: businesses that fail to properly handle consumer data will face legal consequences.
East End Trial Group’s work in Pennsylvania, combined with the aggressive enforcement by California firms like Tauler Smith and Swigart Law Group, has created a new normal where privacy compliance is non-negotiable. The attorneys leading this charge aren’t going away—they’re getting more sophisticated, better funded, and increasingly successful.
For businesses, the choice is clear: invest in proper privacy compliance now, or pay far more later in settlements, damages, and reputational harm. The consumer rights attorneys are watching, and they’re ready to act when businesses fall short.
