Tammy has 25 years of experience representing her clients in complex litigation, with a particular focus on class actions and multidistrict litigation. Tammy has successfully defended more than 100 nationwide and statewide class actions and MDLs, including companies sued in class actions under California’s onerous CLRA and UCL consumer protection laws, as well as other states’ consumer protection laws.

As a Certified Information Privacy Professional in the United States, Tammy counsels clients on privacy and data security issues and handles class actions arising from data breaches and alleged privacy incidents. She handles nationwide and statewide data breach class actions under California’s CCPA laws as well as other states’ laws. Tammy and the rest of Shook’s Biometric Privacy Task Force currently represent more companies in Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) class action lawsuits than almost any other firm in the country. 

Her class action experience also extends to consumer fraud, property-based, contract, tort, medical monitoring, product liability and privacy-related claims. This experience also includes handling class and collective copycat litigation in foreign countries. 

Tammy’s counseling practice focuses on advising clients on mitigating potential claims, advertising compliance and substantiation of marketing and advertising claims and other issues. She also advises her clients on a number of regulatory schemes in the United States and in foreign countries.

Tammy recognizes that class actions can be debilitating for clients and that often the best solution is to end the litigation quickly. In other instances, it is necessary to fight for her clients to avoid being viewed as an easy target. When a matter calls for it, Tammy is well-versed in settling class actions early and efficiently, and she regularly develops and conducts programs for her clients and co-counsel on defending and settling class actions. 

Tammy has represented a wide array of household names in high-stakes litigation, including Bayer, Craft Brew Alliance, Colgate-Palmolive, Coca-Cola, DuPont, Greenies, Hertz, Honest Tea, Lorillard Tobacco Company, Nestle-Purina, Philip Morris and Union Pacific. Additionally, her recognitions include being named among the “Top 250 Women in Litigation-California,” by Benchmark Litigation.

Publications and Presentations

Protecting Your Company's Brand: How to Minimize the Risk of a Consumer Class Action Lawsuit and Maximize the Chances of Winning if One Is Filed, Association of Corporate Counsel, San Francisco, California, December 4, 2017 (with Amir Nassihi, Andrew Chang, Joan Camagong and Matthew Wolfe).

Women Counsel Collaboration: How In-House and Outside Counsel Can Help Advance Each Other's Career, Panelist, Women Legal 2015.

Tammy B. Webb & Ina D. Chang, Drawing the Line Between Class Action and Quasi-Class Action, 11:1 Mass Torts Litigation (ABA Section of Litigation), Fall 2012.

Managing Class Actions in an MDL Environment: The Application of Class Action Principles to an Individual Claim MDL Proceeding, 2012 Sedona Conference® on Complex Litigation - Class Actions.

The Consequences of CAFA: Litigation Strategies in Post CAFA Complex Litigation, 2012 Sedona Conference® on Complex Litigation - Class Actions.

Defeating Product-Liability-Based Consumer Fraud Class Actions, 2009 ABA Section of Litigation Joint CLE.

Assessing Defenses to Class Cert – in Light of IPO and Its Progeny – Challenging the Loss Causation and Market Efficiency, 2008 Defense Research Institute Annual Meeting.

Recent Trends in Class Actions Violations Involving the Automotive Industry, 2008 Emerging Issues in Motor Vehicle Product Liability Litigation.

The Evolution of Medical Monitoring Claims in Class Actions, National Forum on Class Actions and Complex Litigation.

The Role of FRCP 23(c)(4) in Employment Class Actions, Shook, Hardy & Bacon Annual Employment Law Update.

Looking Back at the Class Action Fairness Act After the First Year, Shook, Hardy & Bacon Annual Update of the Law.

Tammy Webb, The Functional Effect of Eliminating Gender Bias in Jury Selection: A Critique and Analysis of J.E.B. v. Alabama, 48 Oklahoma Law Review 173 (1995).