Skip to main contentHeiting v. Valvoline
The tentative ruling would allow the chat wiretap claim to proceed because the party exception was not established on the pleadings. It would require amendment of the computer-access claim.
Case record
- Los Angeles Superior Court
- CIPA and CDAFA
- 23STCV22583
- Tentative: Wiretap claim survives; computer-access claim needs amendment
- 30 May 2024
- 16 October 2026
What this record establishes
The source is a court’s tentative text mirrored by rulings.law. This record does not establish whether the court adopted or changed it at the hearing, and does not establish the current docket status. A tentative pleading decision evaluates allegations; it is not a finding that tracking occurred or that a party broke the law. This trial-court text is not binding appellate precedent.
Checks for your own systems
Inth’s technical interpretation: use this case to choose what evidence to collect in your own implementation. These checks are not instructions issued by the court or regulator.
- Map every session-replay and chat vendor, including embedded frames and server relays.
- Compare what the site receives with what each vendor can receive, read, retain and use independently.
- Record the consent state and the timing of each captured message or field.
Sources and limits
Source review: 16 October 2026. This record covers the cited source and procedural stage. It does not audit the organisation’s present implementation or establish every later legal development.