Call toll free: 833-4HSGLAW

Peter Jannace

Location: Louisville, Kentucky


Phone: 502-636-4333

Peter Jannace has broad experience in representing clients in administrative law, civil rights, class actions and other complex litigation, constitutional law, consumer protection, education law, employment law, family law and probate law. Prior to his employment with HSGLaW, he worked at Branstetter, Stranch & Jennings, PLLC for nearly three years.

Mr. Jannace is a 2010 graduate of the University of Louisville, and earned his J.D. from Hofstra University School of Law in 2013.

Mr. Jannace currently lives in Crestwood, Kentucky with his wife, son, three dogs, and other animals.

Areas of Practice

  •  Administrative Law

  • Appellate Advocacy

  • Civil Rights

  • Class Actions and Complex Litigation

  • Constitutional Law

  • Labor and Employment


  • Hofstra University School of Law, J.D., 2013

  • University of Louisville, B.S., 2010


  • English

Bar Admissions

  • Kentucky, 2014
  • U.S. District Court Western District of Kentucky, 2014
  • U.S. District Court Eastern District of Kentucky, 2021
  • U.S. Court of Appeals 6th Circuit, 2019


Representative cases include:


  • Reetz v. Advocate Aurora Health, Inc., 405 Wis.2d 298 (Wis. App. 2022) (reversing order dismissing data breach class action, and holding that post breach fraudulent bank charges constituted injury in fact and actual damages under Wisconsin law)

  • Boyle v. United Parcel Serv. Co. (AIR), No. 3:21-CV-135-CRS, 2022 WL 138596 (W.D. Ky. Jan. 14, 2022) (remanding action to Jefferson Circuit Court, Kentucky)

  • Smith v. Bennett, 644 S.W.3d 516 (Ky. App. 2021) (reversing judgment in favor of Laurel County Schools, and holding that tenured teachers are not divested of portable tenure by working for less than a full school year for intervening years)

  • Crawford v. Thyssenkrupp Materials NA, Inc., No. 4:21-cv-390 MTS, 2021 WL 4843957 (E.D. Mo. Oct. 18, 2021) (remanding action to Circuit Court for the City of St. Louis, Missouri).

  • Mitchem v. Hankins, 339 F.R.D. 129 (E.D. Ky. 2021) (only known exemplar case finding “good cause” to extend service deadline under Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 4(m) out of the Eastern District of Kentucky)

  • Laborers’ Int’l Union of N. Am., Local Union No. 576 v. Churchill Downs Racetrack, LLC, No. 3:19-CV-936-RGJ, 2021 WL 1109357 (W.D. Ky. Mar. 23, 2021) (grant of partial summary judgment in favor of Union to compel employer to arbitrate)

  • Marshall v. Conway Reg. Med. Ctr., No. 4:20-CV-00933 JM, 2020 WL 5746839 (E.D. Ark. Sep. 25, 2020) (remanding action to Faulkner Circuit Court, Arkansas)

  • Clemons v. Shelby Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 818 Fed. Appx. 453, (6th Cir. 2020) (reversing summary judgment in favor of defendants, in part, and finding triable issue of fact as to claim pursuant to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act)

  • Young v. Hinton-Graves, No. 2019-CA-001102-ME, 2020 WL 862023, (Ky. App. Feb. 21, 2020) (reversing family court order awarding grandparent visitation)

  • McQuillan ex rel. Schneider v. Cab. for Health & Fam. Servs., No. 2018-CA-000885-MR, 2019 WL 4233167, (Ky. App. Sep. 6, 2019) (invalidating 900 KAR 2:050, as contrary to the Residents’ Rights Act, KRS 216.510, et seq.)

  • Smith v. City of Hillview, No. 3:18-cv-00595-CRS-CHL (W.D. Ky. 2019) ($100,000.00 settlement for unlawful search and seizure)
    Hughes v. Ky. Unemp’t Ins. Comm’n, No. 2017-CA-001105-MR, 2018 WL 6444021, (Ky. App. Dec. 7, 2018) (reversing trial court, and the Kentucky Unemployment Insurance Commission, by finding that final agency action did not comport with the “residuum rule”, and was therefore not supported by substantial evidence)

  • Hardin v. Jeff. Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 558 S.W.3d 1 (Ky. App. 2018) (reversing trial court, and holding that KRS 161.765 counts administrative experience accrued across school districts)

  • Savidge v. Pharm-Save, Inc., No. 3:17-CV-00186-TBR, 2017 WL 5986972, (W.D. Ky. Dec. 1, 2017) (Russell, J.) (wherein Judge Russell reversed his own 2012 opinion, and predicted that Kentucky courts would recognize out-of-pocket costs related to credit monitoring in response to PII compromise as a cognizable injury under Kentucky law).

    In addition to Mr. Jannace’s broad appellate practice, he has litigated countless data breach class actions across the country and has played an instrumental role in securing millions of dollars on behalf of class members whose sensitive and confidential personal information was compromised. Mr. Jannace has prevailed in those cases on nearly innumerable procedural and substantive motions in both federal and state court. Far too many to list here. 

Professional Honors and Activities


  • American Bar Association
  • Kentucky Bar Association
  • Louisville Bar Association