J. Austin Moore

Kansas City - Associate | 816-714-7105 (Direct) | moore@stuevesiegel.com

Austin Moore litigates high-stakes cases. He practices in state and federal courts across the country and regularly takes on major corporations in nationwide class actions.

Austin focuses his practice on three primary practice areas:

Data Breach and Privacy Litigation. Austin has represented consumers in several of the nation’s largest data breach class actions, including lawsuits against Target, the Home Depot, and Anthem, Inc.  He currently is representing consumers in multi-district litigation against Equifax. The Equifax breach – considered to be the worst corporate data breach in history – affected nearly half the U.S. population. Austin is a national leader in this emerging area of the law and recently co-authored “Securing Data Breach Claims” for the American Association for Justice’s Trial magazine.

Consumer Class Actions. A former defense attorney, Austin has significant experience litigating complex cases under state and federal antitrust and consumer protection statutes. Austin has brought class actions on behalf of victims of unlawful debt collection practices under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act and inaccurate credit reporting under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). Austin has also filed cases against corporate defendants for price-fixing, false advertising, and other anti-competitive practices. As part of his practice, Austin has obtained a number of important appellate victories on issues including the enforceability of consumer arbitration agreements and Article III standing to sue.

Sexual Assault Liability. Austin advocates for victims of sexual assault in civil cases against their perpetrators and other negligent parties. He respects the sensitivity of these cases by working with local counseling centers and exhibiting absolute discretion in all sexual assault matters. He currently is suing Uber Technologies, Inc. on behalf of a young woman who was sexually assaulted by her driver. Through investigating the matter, Austin determined that the driver was previously convicted of attempted first-degree murder and that Uber had received multiple warnings that the driver assaulted and harassed other women. The resulting lawsuit asserts claims for negligence, fraudulent misrepresentations, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, among other claims.

Super Lawyers has named Austin a “Rising Star” in class action law for the past four years. In 2016, Missouri Lawyers Weekly named Austin an “Up and Coming Lawyer.”

Before joining Stueve Siegel Hanson in 2013, Austin was in private practice in St. Louis, where he primarily defended class action cases. He credits this experience with helping him understand how defense lawyers will approach a case –  and helping him craft litigation strategies that secure a courtroom advantage.

  • EXPERIENCE
  • HONORS & AWARDS
  • EDUCATION
  • BAR ADMISSIONS
  • COMMUNITY

Current Cases

Equifax Data Breach Litigation (Northern District of Georgia) – Austin is working alongside co-lead counsel Norman Siegel representing consumers in multi-district litigation against Equifax following its massive data breach impacting nearly half the U.S. population. The lawsuit alleges that Equifax, a credit reporting agency, was grossly negligent in maintaining and securing the personal information it collected for hundreds of millions of consumers.

Uber Sexual Assault Lawsuit (Jackson County, Missouri) – Austin filed a lawsuit against Uber on behalf of a young woman who was raped by her Uber driver. An investigation revealed that prior to the assault, the driver had been convicted of attempted murder and sentenced to 16 years in prison and other women had complained to Uber about the driver’s assaultive and harassing conduct. The case, currently pending in Missouri state court, has been reported on by the Verge, the Kansas City Star, and media outlets from across the world.

OPM Data Breach Litigation (District of Columbia) – Austin is working with lead counsel representing current, former and prospective government employees and contractors in multi-district litigation against the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and government contractor KeyPoint for failing to safeguard and secure the personal information of up to 21.5 million individuals. The OPM data breach lawsuits are currently consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

NBEO Data Breach Lawsuit (District of Maryland) – Austin represents optometrists across the country in a class action lawsuit against the National Board of Examiners in Optometry (NBEO), the primary testing organization in the field of optometry, asserting that the NBEO suffered a data breach affecting thousands of optometrists. Following a successful appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, the case is currently proceeding to discovery in the trial court.

Reyes v. Experian (Central District of California) – Austin filed a class action lawsuit against Experian, one of the “big three” credit reporting agencies, for reporting loan debts associated with the notorious Western Sky online lending scheme. The lawsuit alleges that Experian violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by publishing more than 125,000 accounts reported by Western Sky’s debt collectors for years after Experian was instructed to delete those accounts.

Recent Litigation Highlights

Anthem Data Breach Litigation (Northern District of California) – In August 2018, a federal district court in California granted final approval of a $115 million settlement to consumers whose personal information was hacked from Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield insurance companies in early 2015. Austin worked with lead counsel representing numerous named plaintiffs in the litigation to help secure the landmark settlement.

Academy of Art Data Breach Lawsuit (San Francisco Superior Court) – In July 2018, the San Francisco Superior Court granted final approval to a class action settlement on behalf of current and former employees of Academy of Art University (AAU), a for-profit art school in San Francisco, California. The case stemmed from AAU’s April 2016 announcement that the IRS W-2 forms of thousands of AAU employees were compromised in an e-mail “spoofing” scam. Austin was appointed settlement class counsel on behalf of the class.

Home Depot Data Breach Litigation (Northern District of Georgia) – Austin was a key member of the leadership group appointed to represent consumers in multi-district litigation against the Home Depot following a massive data breach affecting more than 60 million consumers. In August 2016, the court approved a final settlement creating a $13 million cash fund, providing for 18 months of monitoring services, and requiring significant business practice changes. The presiding judge called the settlement an “exceptional result” and observed that it “appears to be the most comprehensive settlement achieved in large-scale data breach litigation.”

Target Data Breach Litigation (District of Minnesota) – Austin was a member of the leadership team appointed to represent a class of consumers in multi-district litigation against Target over its massive 2013 data breach affecting more than 40 million consumers. In June 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed approval of a settlement requiring Target to create a $10 million settlement fund and significantly upgrade its data security practices. 

Appellate Litigation

Hutton v. National Board of Examiners in Optometry, Inc., 892 F.3d 613 (4th Cir. 2018) – Austin helped obtain a significant victory for data breach plaintiffs in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit when the panel reversed the district court’s dismissal of a class action lawsuit alleging that the National Board of Examiners in Optometry (NBEO) suffered a data breach that resulted in massive, nationwide fraud. The published opinion addresses the injury and traceability elements for assessing Article III standing in the context of a data breach.

Moss v. First Premier Bank, 835 F. 3d 260 (2d. Cir. 2016) – Austin briefed and argued an appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit addressing whether Section 5 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) permits appointment of a substitute arbitrator when the contractually-designated arbitrator declines to hear the case. In a published opinion, the Second Circuit agreed with Austin’s position and held that appointing a substitute arbitrator would be akin to rewriting the parties’ agreement, which would contradict the plain text of the FAA.

Parm v. National Bank of California, 835 F. 3d 1331 (11th Cir. 2016) – Austin co-authored an appellate brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit arguing that a tribal arbitration agreement could not be enforced against his client because it required the arbitration to be conducted under non-existent tribal law and procedures. In a published opinion, the Eleventh Circuit agreed that the agreement was unenforceable because it required the parties to arbitrate before “an illusory and unavailable arbitral forum.” 

Flagg v. First Premier Bank, No. 15-14052 (11th Cir. 2016) – Austin co-authored an appellate brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit addressing the enforceability of loan agreement that required the parties to arbitrate before the National Arbitration Forum, an entity that stopped accepting consumer arbitration claims in 2009. Because the agreement contemplated arbitration before a forum that could not hear the dispute, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision to deny arbitration.

Affordable Communities of Missouri v. Fed. Nat. Mortgage Ass’n, 714 F.3d 1069 (8th Cir. 2013) – Austin authored an appellate brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on behalf of a Missouri real estate developer appealing the dismissal of its lawsuit against Fannie Mae for subjecting it to wrongful loan pre-payment penalties. In May 2013, the Eighth Circuit reversed the district court’s dismissal of the developer’s breach of contract claim finding that an ambiguity in Fannie Mae’s loan documents supported the cause of action.

Publications

The Impact of Scalia’s Death on Forced Arbitration and Consumer Class Actions, Missouri Lawyers Weekly (2016)

Securing Data-Breach Claims, Co-Author, Trial Magazine (2015)

Are Parens Patriae Suits Subject to Federal Jurisdiction under CAFA? Co-Author, DRI Feature Article (2012)

Resale Price Maintenance After Leegin: Why Treating Vertical Price-Fixing as “Inherently Suspect” Is the Only Viable Alternative to the Traditional Rule of Reason, 36 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol’y 289 (2011)

State Courts

Missouri

Illinois

U.S. Federal Courts

U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois

U.S. Courts of Appeals

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

Washington University School of Law, St. Louis, Missouri, 2011, J.D

Honors: Dean's List; Mary Collier Hitchcock Prize (2011); CALI Award for Excellence in Legal Practice II: Advocacy (Highest Grade in Legal Appellate Writing)

Law Review: Washington University Journal of Law & Policy, Associate Editor, Published Member

University of Mississippi, Oxford, Mississippi, 2008, B.A.

Honors: Summa Cum Laude

Honors:  Chancellor's Honor Roll; Phi Beta Kappa; Phi Kappa Phi

 

Super Lawyers: Missouri & Kansas “Rising Star” in Class Action Litigation (2015-2018). Selection reserved for no more than 2.5 percent of Missouri/Kansas attorneys 40 years old or younger or in practice 10 years or less.

Missouri Lawyers Weekly: “Up & Coming Lawyer” (2016). Honorees selected based on their demonstration of excellence and potential to make a difference in the legal profession and their communities. The award recognizes lawyers who are 40 or younger, or within the first 10 years of practice.

Committee Memberships

The Missouri Bar

Illinois State Bar Association

Kansas City Metropolitan Bar Association (KCMBA); Federal Courts Advocates Section CLE Committee Co-Chair (2016-2018)

Missouri Association of Trial Attorneys (MATA)

American Association for Justice (AAJ)

American Bar Association, Commercial & Business Litigation Division

The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation. We invite you to contact us and welcome your calls, letters and electronic mail. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established.

The choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements.