Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company has been the target of multiple class action lawsuits over the past several years, covering robocalls to consumers, alleged mismanagement of its employee 401(k) plan, pet insurance cancellations, a vision-services data breach, auto claim deductions, and website terms restricting negative reviews. Some of these cases produced multimillion-dollar settlements that have already paid out; others are still being litigated in 2026.
Whether you can still get money depends almost entirely on timing. Below is where each case stands and what, if anything, is still open to you.
Cases Still Active in 2026
The 401(k) Guaranteed Fund ERISA Case
If you are a current or former Nationwide employee who invested in the Guaranteed Investment Fund inside the company 401(k) plan, this is the lawsuit to watch. Two related cases, Edwards v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company and Sweeney v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. The complaints allege that Nationwide breached its fiduciary duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act by setting artificially low interest rates on the Guaranteed Investment Fund and keeping the spread between those rates and what the general account actually earned. The Edwards complaint claimed participants lost upwards of $142 million between 2014 and 2019.1ClassAction.org. Class Action: Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. Employees Lost $142 Million Due to Alleged 401(k) Plan Mismanagement
On March 28, 2024, Judge Sarah D. Morrison certified a class covering all participants and beneficiaries who invested in the Guaranteed Fund at any time after March 26, 2014.2Cohen Milstein. Nationwide Savings Plan Litigation In a ruling unsealed on February 9, 2026, Judge Morrison ordered the surviving claims to a bench trial.3Law360. Nationwide ERISA 401(k) Class Action Heads to Bench Trial No settlement has been reached. Class members do not need to file anything right now; if the case produces a judgment or settlement, notice goes to plan participants through the plan’s records.
The California Negative-Review Lawsuit
In January 2024, Pulbrook v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company was filed in federal court in California (Case No. 5:24-cv-00469). The lawsuit challenges terms of service on Nationwide’s website and mobile app that it says effectively prohibit users from posting negative or “disparaging” content, including anything “threatening, defamatory, derogatory … or otherwise injurious to Nationwide.” The plaintiffs argue those provisions violate California consumer protection law. The proposed class is anyone in California who visited, used, or transacted on Nationwide’s digital platforms.4ClassAction.org. Class Action Says Nationwide Illegally Silences California Consumers From Posting Negative Reviews on Website, App The case remains active as of early 2026 and has not yet been certified or settled.
Settlements That Have Already Closed
Several Nationwide class actions have settled, but their claim windows have passed. You cannot submit a new claim; you may still have a narrow right to request a check reissue in one case.
Blizzard v. Nationwide — Pet Insurance Robocalls ($1.4 Million)
Blizzard v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, filed in Miami-Dade County, Florida in July 2025, alleged that prerecorded voice calls about pet insurance renewals and expirations violated the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act and the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act. The class covered anyone in the United States who received one or more such prerecorded calls on a cell phone between January 6, 2021, and October 22, 2025.5TCPA Pet Settlement. Blizzard v. Nationwide Settlement FAQ
Judge Mavel Ruiz granted preliminary approval on October 22, 2025, and final approval on February 23, 2026.6TCPA Pet Settlement. Blizzard v. Nationwide Settlement Home Approved claimants received up to $17.50 each after fees and administrative costs. Checks were issued on May 4, 2026. If you were a class member and did not cash your check, the deadline to request a reissue is September 10, 2026, in writing to the settlement administrator in Portland, Oregon.5TCPA Pet Settlement. Blizzard v. Nationwide Settlement FAQ The claims deadline itself passed on March 11, 2026, so new claims are no longer accepted.
Nationwide Vision / Sightcare Data Breach ($3.45 Million)
Between April 20 and May 17, 2021, unauthorized actors accessed email and network systems belonging to USV Optical, Inc., potentially exposing names, addresses, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, driver’s license numbers, financial information, and medical and insurance details for more than 710,000 people connected to Nationwide Vision, Nationwide Optometry, and Sightcare.7HIPAA Journal. $3.4M Settlement Resolves Claims Against Nationwide Vision, Sightcare Over 2021 Data Breach
The resulting case, In re U.S. Vision Data Breach Litigation, settled for $3.45 million. Class members could choose a pro-rata cash payment (expected around $50), reimbursement up to $300 for ordinary expenses, or up to $5,000 for documented identity-theft losses, plus 24 months of three-bureau credit monitoring with $1 million in identity theft insurance.8ClassAction.org. Torres v. US Vision Inc. et al. Proposed Settlement Agreement The claims deadline passed on September 23, 2024, final approval was granted October 15, 2024, and payments went out on April 9, 2025.9Nationwide Sightcare Settlement. Nationwide Sightcare Data Breach Settlement No new claims can be filed.
Rice-Redding v. Nationwide — Earlier Robocall Case ($5 Million)
The first major Nationwide robocall settlement came out of Rice-Redding v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The complaint alleged autodialed calls, texts, and prerecorded messages sent without consent, including to more than 230 people on the National Do Not Call Registry.10Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein. Judge Gives Preliminary Approval to $5M Proposed Settlement in Nationwide Insurance Robocall Class Action Nationwide paid $5 million into a non-reversionary fund without admitting fault, covering three subclasses tied to Do Not Call Registry calls, transferred calls, and automated telemarketing calls without consent.11Top Class Actions. $5M Nationwide Telemarketing Class Action Settlement Gets OK Judge William M. Ray II granted final approval on August 1, 2019.12PACER Monitor. Rice-Redding et al v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company The case is closed.
Steinberg v. Nationwide — Auto Insurance “Betterment”
An older case worth knowing about if you had an older Nationwide auto claim: Steinberg v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, filed in the Eastern District of New York, challenged “betterment” deductions, where Nationwide reduced claim payments by the value difference between a worn-out failed part and its new replacement. The plaintiff said that practice was not defined in or authorized by the policy. The 2008 settlement covered policyholders with collision or comprehensive coverage who had a betterment deduction between January 1, 1993, and November 25, 2008, and refunded 50 percent of the betterment charge. Nationwide also agreed to add explicit betterment-disclosure language to its policy forms.13NAIC. Steinberg v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company Summary This settlement is long closed.
Cases That Were Dismissed
Two lawsuits ended without any payout. In Silberman v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, filed June 4, 2025, three policyholders alleged fraud and deceptive marketing of “Whole Pet with Wellness” policies, claiming Nationwide had promised pets would “never” be dropped due to age before canceling an estimated 100,000 to 300,000 policies that disproportionately affected older or chronically ill animals.14Agency Checklists. Nationwide Faces Class Action Over Its Pet Insurance Cancellations Judge Brian E. Murphy dismissed the complaint in its entirety on November 20, 2025, finding the plaintiffs had not adequately pleaded injury and that their reliance on the alleged statements was unreasonable as a matter of law.15PACER Monitor. Silberman et al v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company et al
A separate follow-on to Rice-Redding, Chambers v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, was brought in the Northern District of Ohio by 83 people who had opted out of the earlier settlement. The court dismissed it in May 2020 after finding the complaint offered only “formulaic” and “conclusory” allegations without specific dates, times, or callers.16GovInfo. Chambers et al. v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company
How to Tell If You’re a Class Member
Class membership is defined by the specific facts of each case: the type of policy you held, the date range of the challenged conduct, the state you lived in, or whether your personal data was in a particular breach. Settlement administrators usually mail or email a notice to people they can identify from company records, but notice does not always reach every eligible person, especially after an address change.
For any active case, you do not need to do anything until a court approves a class and notice is sent. For a settled case, the official settlement website is the authoritative source for deadlines, eligibility, and claim status. Deadlines are enforced strictly. If a claim window has closed, late submissions are not accepted, and class members who did not opt out are bound by the settlement and cannot bring their own lawsuit over the same conduct.
If you received a check from the Blizzard pet-robocall settlement and have not cashed it, the September 10, 2026, reissue deadline is the one date still open to consumers across the Nationwide cases covered here.5TCPA Pet Settlement. Blizzard v. Nationwide Settlement FAQ