Class Action Alleges That Grammarly Misappropriated the Names of Journalists and Authors Through its “Expert Review” That Lets Users Get Feedback on Writing From Experts

Written By Peter Romer-Friedman

Lawsuit alleges that Grammarly violated state privacy laws that protect people from having their names and identities used for commercial purposes without their prior consent

For media please contact Peter Romer-Friedman - (202) 355-6364 or peter@prf-law.com

For members of the proposed class please contact info@prf-law.comfor more info, and read the UPDATE at the end of this page

New York, NY— Today, Julia Angwin, an award-winning journalist and editor, filed a class action lawsuit in federal court in Manhattan against Superhuman Platform, Inc., the owner of Grammarly (Grammarly), alleging that Grammarly violated the privacy and publicity rights of her and many other journalists, authors, and editors by exploiting their names and identities for profit without their consent through Grammarly’s “Expert Review” tool.

As the lawsuit alleges, in August 2025 Grammarly launched an “Expert Review” tool where, for $12 a month, Grammarly users could upload their writing and receive real-time feedback and comments on how to improve their prose from well-known journalists like Ms. Angwin and even famous authors like Stephen King, among other acclaimed journalists, writers, editors, and other professionals. However, as the suit alleges, Grammarly never sought or obtained consent from Ms. Angwin or the other “Experts” whose names and identities Grammarly misappropriated in the Expert Review tool. The suit alleges that this conduct violated New York and California laws that require a person’s consent before using their name for commercial purposes.

The lawsuit asks the Court to certify a plaintiff class of all the “Experts” whose names and identities Grammarly used without consent in its Expert Review, to prohibit Grammarly from further using their names and identities without their consent, and to compensate the “Experts” for the unauthorized use of their names and identities.   

Ms. Angwin is represented by Peter Romer-Friedman Law PLLC, a civil rights and public interest law firm based in New York City and Washington, DC.

Julia Angwin said, “I have worked for decades honing my skills as a writer and editor, and I am distressed to discover that a tech company is selling an imposter version of my hard-earned expertise.”

Peter Romer-Friedman, the founder and managing partner of Peter Romer-Friedman Law PLLC, said, “For over 100 years, New York law has prohibited companies from using a person’s name for commercial purposes without their consent. The law does not provide an exception for technology companies or AI. We’re filing this lawsuit today to protect the rights of hard-working reporters, editors, and authors so that they can decide when and how their names are used.”

The lawsuit is known as Angwin v. Superhuman Platform, Inc., No. 26 Civ. 02005-JGK (S.D.N.Y), and is currently pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Case Documents

Media

Update on Angwin v. Superhuman Litigation

  • Since Julia Angwin filed a class action lawsuit over Grammarly’s Expert Review tool on March 11, 2026, Angwin v. Superhuman Platform, Inc., No. 26 Civ. 02005-JGK (S.D.N.Y.), Julia and her counsel at Peter Romer-Friedman Law PLLC have heard from many people who are rightly concerned that their names and identities were used by Grammarly or may have been used for commercial purposes without their consent. We appreciate all the interest and enthusiasm that this case has generated. We want to underscore that the case was filed as a class action lawsuit so that Julia and her lawyers can seek relief for all of the people in the United States whose names or identities used by Grammarly’s Expert Review tool (the Class Members), and in this litigation we plan to ask the Court to certify a nationwide class that includes all of those Class Members. Typically, when a court certifies a class action under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the class members do not need to do anything to remain in the class, but they are allowed to “opt out” of the class if they don’t want to be a part of it. In the discovery process in this litigation, we will ask Grammarly’s owner, Superhuman, to identify all the people who were included in its Expert Review Tool so that, at the appropriate time, those people can be notified that they are members of the Class.

  • Anyone who thinks they may be a class member of the proposed Class can contact Peter Romer-Friedman Law at info@prf-law.com to make sure we have your contact information, and we are happy to answer any questions that you may have about the case. At this time, however, you do not need to take any action to join the Angwin case to be included as a member of the proposed Class. (At the same time, we recommend againstentering into any agreement with Grammarly, as Grammarly might claim that by doing so you’ve waived your rights in this case).

  • We will post periodic updates here as the case progresses. We look forward to representing all the members of the proposed class and getting justice for them.

  • Please checkhttps://prf-law.com/current-cases/class-action-alleges-that-grammarly-misappropriated-the-names-of-journalists-and-authors-through-its-expert-reviewperiodically for updates

Peter Romer-Friedman
Next

Mother Who Advocated for Disabled Son’s Educational Needs Retaliated Against by NYC Department of Education