Uber is not liable for the sexual assault of a woman who said she was attacked by her driver on a ride she
ordered from the ridesharing app, a California jury said on Tuesday, according to an attorney for the plaintiff.
At the end of a three-week civil trial in San Francisco Superior Court, the jury found that Uber was negligent i
n terms of the measures it put in place to protect the anonymous woman’s safety, but found that the negligence was not
a substantial factor in causing the woman’s harm, according to Celine Cutter, one of her lawyers.
The case was the first to go to trial out of more than 500 lawsui
ts consolidated in California state court. There are also more than 2,5
00 lawsuits making similar claims that have been centralized in a federal court in California.
The woman, who went by Jessica C. at trial, sued in 2021, claiming she was assaulted by an Uber driver in 2016. Duri
ng the ride, her driver pulled off on a side street, restraining, groping and kissing her, according to her attorneys.
William Levin and Laurel Simes, two of the lawyers who repres
ented her at trial, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Watch More Image Part 2 >>>
“Uber has worked for years to raise the bar on safety, and will co
ntinue to do so in the years ahead,” an Uber spokesperson said in a statement.
The woman’s lawsuit was chosen to serve as the first “bellwet
her” for the state court litigation. In litigation with many plaintiffs ass
erting similar claims, bellwether trials are used to test the claims and
establish what they may be worth. Judges may use the outcome of th
e trial to manage the remaining cases, or lawyers can use them to inform settlement negotiations.
The woman’s attorneys had asked the jury for between $175,00
0 and $1.2 million in compensatory damages for each year of her life, su
ggesting larger figures for the years closest to the assault. They did not suggest a number for punitive damages.
SAFETY PRACTICES IN THE SPOTLIGHT
The lawsuits allege Uber was aware it had a problem with drivers assaulting riders, but kept data on how man
y assaults took place from the public and did not take action to address the issue.
The plaintiffs have argued that Uber knew that things like assigning female riders to female drivers or requiri
ng dash cams to record driver and passenger interactions would reduce assaults, but failed to broadly implement such programs.
Uber has maintained it should not be liable for criminal conduct by
the drivers it connects with passengers, and that its background checks and disclosures about assaults were sufficient.
The lawsuits threaten to reopen wounds from Uber’s early years, when the company was dogged by safety co
ntroversies, allegations of lax driver vetting, and a culture critics said prioritized growth over protecting passengers.