The Ninth Circuit held that, before one San Francisco judge, more than 1,600 sexual assault cases against Uber would be permitted to continue.
The decision issued Monday upheld an earlier ruling by the Council of Federal Judges appointed to centralize private lawsuits from across the country.
Experts said the lawsuit was closely followed by a home sharing platform, dog walking services and other “independent contractor” apps. This also clashes with Lyft, Uber’s main competitor, as well as sexual assault liability claims.
Uber claimed that it had four-year-old provisions in fine printing of user agreements banned riders from taking part in large lawsuits against the platform.
Hundreds of rape survivors claim they skimed on driver background checks, unable to report sexual violence to police, and allowed sex offenders to drive for the company.
The Court of Appeals said federal law outweighs Uber’s Terms of Use contracts. This said US District Judge Charles R. Breyer, for the Northern District of California, previously deemed “unenforceable.”
Judge Lucy Haeron Koh wrote in a High Court decision that the 50-year precedent stood up to the type of reversal that ride-sharing apps are sought.
“Uber is not sure we should be the first,” the judge wrote.
Experts said the control must accept a legal line of contract apps for contract apps before ordering takeout, posting thirst traps, borrowing e-books, or viewing lab results. Experts said long exemptions are inevitable and are increasingly invalidating.
“Most people don’t even read those terms,” says Lindsay Nako, executive director of Impact Fund, a social justice litigation group, but a clicked contract provides strict control over what happens if you get injured.
Although Uber did not respond to requests for comment, in his appeal to the Ninth Circuit, the platform’s attorneys argued that on its terms the “non-integrated clause” would actually be better for the plaintiffs as it ensures that each case is heard in its own merit, rather than a single clearinghouse suit.
“The terms of use allow the plaintiff to hold the day in court,” wrote an Uber lawyer. “The plaintiff simply agreed to do it individually.”
However, NAKO and others tracking the case said that if Uber could easily unlock a government-integrated case, other large companies would write the same provisions in their own terms of use, entangle federal civil courts in endless duplicate cases, making it much more difficult for victims to collect damages.
Experts said by blocking the clause, the court preserved the right that most users were not aware of being asked to hand out.
“This is a big win for consumers and a bad day for tech companies,” said Kathryn Cosmides, a supporter who supports Survivor, a partnership between victim advocates and personal injury lawyers. “This latest domination sets precedents on app safety. Many companies are very nervous about what will happen. [next] in this case. ”
In a sense, the verdict is simple. By monitoring with survivors and panels, the 9th Circuit confirmed the court’s right to administer its business. Combining similar cases will help save taxpayers money, ease the court backlog and avoid decisions to set precedents that could be conflicting, Koh writes in her decision.
It’s also incredibly common. Currently, about 70% of federal civil cases are awarded as part of multi-district cases, Breyer estimated.
“It’s a huge number that will stir the heart,” Naco said of the multi-district caseload.
Advocates say that claiming a single case in a single court is easier and cheaper than discussing hundreds in courts across the country. It’s also good for the plaintiffs. Plaintiffs are primarily seeking the same documents from the companies they sue.
The integrated lawsuit could facilitate the plaintiffs to prove fraud that they claim to be systematic, experts said. Companies that lose or resolve such cases need to change how they operate, rather than simply pay.
Johnson & Johnson was forced to stop using talc in baby powder in 2023. This follows a multi-district incident that unearthed records showing that ingredients were known to have caused reproductive cancer for half a century.
The integrated lawsuit against OxyContin maker Purdue, widely considered the engine of the opioid crisis, was awarded the biggest award for damages in American history.
For Uber, the loss could mean strengthening background checks, closing people who can sign up to pick up passengers, dropping drivers reported for fraud, installing cameras and recording all rides, and more.
Such changes are expensive and potentially unpopular. But they aren’t the only consequences that ride apps are trying to avoid.
Centralized cases can unearth huge horde that would otherwise not be part of the official record. Uber has fought for months to avoid discoveries in California’s northern district, but the Court of Appeals weighed the cases to see if they could stay there.
“Does Uber want this data they had about the public sexual assault? Hell no!” Cosmith said.
The 9th Circuit refused to appeal, saying, “There is no incentive to take this to court with the ju apprentice through discovery, as the findings will ultimately be made public in civil lawsuits.
“I think we’ll see more people being pursued,” Cosmith said.
Source link
