A Florida appeals court this month handed ridesharing companies like Uber and Lyft a major legal victory with a broad interpretation of what the court called an unusually broad liability immunity law.
The 4th District Court of Appeals, one step shy of the state Supreme Court, found that Lyft Florida Inc. was not liable for the alleged assault by one of its drivers on a passenger, under House Bill 1352, which was signed into law in 2020.
It was the first scrutiny of the 2020 statute by an appellate court.
“The scope of immunity provided by Subsection 18’s plain text is very broad. It appears to sweep in practically any claim against Lyft (or a similar rideshare network operator) for injury suffered during a ride…” the appellate court judges said in the May 13 opinion, upholding a Broward County Circuit Court judge.
“Whether the legislators who voted on the text of the statute actually intended to confer such broad immunity is immaterial. Whether it is wise to confer such broad immunity is not a question for this branch to answer,” Judge Jonathan Lott wrote for the appeals court.
The 2022 Florida law, sponsored in part by then-state Sen. Jeff Brandes, R-St. Petersburg, grants lawsuit immunity regardless of how Lyft may have contributed to the injury—so long as Lyft otherwise complies with the requirements of the rideshare statute. Those requirements include background checks on drivers and a policy barring drivers that have been convicted of crimes.
Brandes, who left the Senate in 2022 and now heads the Florida Policy Project, said the court decision is not surprising and is the intended result of HB 1352.
“The goal with the bill was to make it rock solid that the drivers are independent contractors,” he said Tuesday.
Plaintiffs in many lawsuits around the country have tried to argue that Uber and Lyft drivers are not independent contractors. But to adhere to that notion would set off “cascading consequences that are pretty profound,” Brandes added.
The Florida law came about after a multi-year legislative push by Uber and Lyft in the early 2020s that limited some liability, expanded the gig economy, and curbed some legal obligations to workers. The rideshare giant won laws in several states that spelled out that drivers are independent contractors, not covered by states’ workers’ compensation laws and other employment laws. The Florida immunity law specifies that it does not apply to taxi services or motor carriers, and it bars local governments from making their own regulations, taxes or business license requirements for rideshare drivers.
The May 13 Florida appeals court decision is the latest in a mixed bag of recent court rulings that have examined the ride firms’ liability for drivers’ actions. In Arizona, a federal jury in April awarded $8.5 million to a woman who said she was sexually assaulted by an Uber driver. But a North Carolina federal jury two weeks later awarded just $5,000 in a similar lawsuit.
Still, more than 500 similar cases are pending in California state court and in other states. The Florida appellate court noted that the Florida immunity statute is similar to the federal law known as the Graves Amendment, which provides some immunity to transportation network companies. But the 2022 amendment to the Florida law appears to push the immunity cloak a little further, beyond vicarious liability.
The 4th District Court ruling may have created a “liability vacuum” for rideshare firms and reopens the question of how much responsibility corporations should bear, even when workers are not considered employees, Palm Beach attorney Sean Domnick wrote in Law.com last week.
Others called it a potentially significant win for rideshare companies.
