Court Grants Yahoo's Motion to Compel Arbitration in Privacy Class Action
A federal court has granted Yahoo's motion to compel arbitration for five plaintiffs and stayed proceedings pending arbitration.
2 reports on this incident · first at Aug 28, 2026, 4:48 p.m. ET
Earlier reports
Aug 28, 2026, 4:48 p.m. ETFirst report
Court Compels Arbitration for Five Plaintiffs in Yahoo Privacy Class Action
A class action lawsuit against Yahoo Inc. and Yahoo AD Tech LLC alleges that the companies violated privacy laws by collecting information about users without consent after they signed up for websites using Yahoo's targeted ConnectID advertising technology, according to a report by the National Law Review.
The court granted Yahoo's motion to compel arbitration for five plaintiffs who have active Yahoo accounts and granted a motion to stay proceedings pending arbitration, the report states. The case is No. 25CV2797 (DLC), 2026 WL 2516944 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 26, 2026).
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 128 Aug 2026, 20:53current
First published.
- Version 128 Aug 2026, 20:48current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.