Uber/Lyft Sexual Assault

December 3, 2024

• MDL Case Count Continues to Rise: The Uber driver sexual assault MDL added 48 new cases in November, bringing the total to 1,459 pending cases. This steady growth reflects the ongoing legal challenges faced by Uber regarding sexual assault incidents involving its drivers.

December 1, 2024

• Court Rejects Uber’s Overly Broad Privilege Claims: The MDL judge has ruled against Uber’s attempt to withhold numerous documents as “privileged,” clarifying that privilege only applies when the primary purpose of a document is legal advice. The court criticized Uber for vague privilege claims and ordered the company to clarify its privilege logs and produce non-privileged documents, ensuring transparency and fairness in the discovery process.

November 26, 2024

• Illinois Woman Files Sexual Assault Lawsuit Against Uber: An Illinois woman has filed a lawsuit against Uber in the MDL, alleging she was sexually assaulted by an Uber driver in Cook County in November 2022.

November 21, 2024

• Discovery Disputes Continue: The MDL magistrate judge is handling several discovery disputes, including those related to the scope of document production and Uber’s claims of privilege. The court has ordered Uber to produce documents from key early employees covering their entire tenure at the company, as well as relevant records dating back to January 1, 2012.

November 19, 2024

• Geographic Distribution of Lawsuits: A recent wave of new Uber lawsuits filed in the MDL reveals a concentration of cases from California, Georgia, Ohio, New York, and Illinois, suggesting a potential correlation with lawyer advertising activity in these states.

November 12, 2024

• Uber Seeks Confidentiality for Internal Documents: Uber has filed a motion to keep certain internal documents confidential, arguing that public release would harm its competitive standing and privacy interests. The company claims the documents contain sensitive information about business plans, privileged communications, and legal strategies.

November 8, 2024

• Uber Sexual Assault MDL: Trial Schedule and Deadlines Set: A recent case management conference in the Uber sexual assault MDL has established key deadlines for the litigation, including a tentative bellwether trial list due date of June 1, 2025. Deadlines for motions to dismiss and related responses have also been set, indicating that the first bellwether trial is likely to occur in 2026.

November 5, 2024

• Key Issues and Disputes in Uber MDL: A new Joint Case Management Statement outlines several key issues and disputes in the Uber sexual assault MDL, which now includes over 1,400 lawsuits across 29 states. These include setting a filing deadline for new cases, handling motions to dismiss and transfer, coordinating discovery efforts, scheduling bellwether trials, and appointing a Special Settlement Master. The parties have differing views on these matters, with plaintiffs pushing for quicker resolution and Uber advocating for a more cautious approach.

November 1, 2024

• MDL Case Count Continues to Rise: The Uber driver sex assault MDL added 65 new cases in October, bringing the total number of pending cases to 1,411. While this represents continued growth, the pace of new filings has slowed slightly compared to September.

October 30, 2024

• Court Orders Lyft to Identify Custodians in Uber Sexual Assault Case: The court has ordered Lyft to identify custodians involved in the Industry Sharing Safety Program (ISSP) by November 8, 2024, as part of the ongoing Uber sexual assault litigation. This ruling addresses a dispute over the scope of a subpoena issued by plaintiffs to Lyft, seeking information relevant to Uber’s safety practices. The court also allows Uber to review Lyft’s production for privileged documents, despite plaintiffs’ arguments that privilege is waived in third-party communications.

October 28, 2024

• Plaintiffs Seek Uber’s Lobbying Records: Plaintiffs’ attorneys are seeking access to Uber’s lobbying records to support their claims that the company prioritized its business interests over passenger safety. They argue that Uber’s lobbying efforts were aimed at shaping regulations in its favor, including avoiding stricter background checks for drivers. Plaintiffs believe these records will demonstrate a pattern of prioritizing profits over safety, which could significantly impact the outcome of the litigation.

October 22, 2024

• Dispute Over Contacting Former Uber Employees: Plaintiffs’ attorneys and Uber are at odds over contacting former Uber employees. Plaintiffs argue they haven’t violated any rules, while Uber claims these communications could breach attorney-client privilege or nondisclosure agreements. Uber seeks a stipulation requiring pre-clearance before contacting former employees, a move plaintiffs oppose.

October 18, 2024

• New Lawsuit Filed: A New Jersey plaintiff filed a lawsuit alleging sexual assault by Uber drivers during rides in January and July of 2023. The complaint seeks compensatory and punitive damages, and a jury trial.

October 16, 2024

• Uber Requests Extension for Document Production in Sexual Assault Litigation: Uber has requested to extend the deadlines for producing documents in the passenger sexual assault litigation. The company wants more time to produce custodial files and privilege logs, arguing that this will help coordinate depositions across multiple cases, including those in California state courts. Plaintiffs have expressed concern that any extension must include a guarantee that all relevant documents, including those previously designated as privileged but later released, will be produced well in advance of depositions.

October 10, 2024

• Court Denies Uber’s Attempt to Reclaim “Privileged” Documents: The court has denied Uber’s attempt to reclaim documents it claims were inadvertently produced and protected by attorney-client privilege. The court found that one of the documents in question, a “Safety Criteria Update Comms Plan,” was created for policy decisions, not legal advice, and therefore not privileged.

October 8, 2024

• Uber’s Lobbying Records Sought in Sexual Assault Litigation: Plaintiffs’ attorneys are seeking access to Uber’s lobbying records from Ballard Partners, aiming to expose the company’s efforts to influence legislation and regulations in a way that prioritized its business interests over passenger safety. The records could potentially reveal how Uber lobbied to avoid stricter background checks and safety measures, despite being aware of the risks to passengers. This move by the plaintiffs seeks to demonstrate a pattern of prioritizing profits over safety, which could significantly impact the outcome of the litigation.

October 5, 2024

• Discovery Disputes Addressed at Status Conference: A status conference focused on resolving several discovery disputes, including issues with Uber’s privilege logs, document production, and handling of hyperlinked files. Disagreements remain regarding the auditing of Uber’s document production and the scope of personnel files to be produced.

October 1, 2024

• Uber Sexual Assault MDL Continues to Grow: Following a significant surge in August, the Uber driver sexual assault MDL experienced more moderate growth in September. Eighty-three new cases were added to the MDL during the month, bringing the total number of pending cases to 1,346.

September 17, 2024:

• Uber Seeks Dismissal of California and New York Cases: Uber has filed a motion to dismiss cases originating in California or New York, citing jurisdictional laws. However, this effort is expected to face challenges.

September 13, 2024:

• New California Lawsuit Filed: A new sexual assault lawsuit against Uber was filed in California state court. The plaintiff alleges that an Uber driver engaged in inappropriate behavior and touched her inappropriately during a ride. This adds to the increasing number of Uber driver sexual abuse cases filed in California state courts, which currently outnumber those in the MDL.

September 10, 2024:

• Massive Growth in Uber Driver Sexual Assault MDL: The Uber driver sexual assault MDL experienced an unprecedented surge in pending cases during August. The number of cases skyrocketed from 387 at the end of July to 1,263, marking a threefold increase. This ise, attributed to the addition of nearly 900 cases in a mere 30 days, represents one of the most significant percentage increases ever recorded for an MDL within a single month..

September 3, 2024:

• 9th Circuit Rules Uber Has Duty of Care Towards Drivers and Passengers: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled that Uber has a duty of care towards its drivers and passengers due to its control over the driver-rider matching process and its representations of driver safety. This ruling, although unreported, could influence the ongoing Uber sexual assault MDL, emphasizing Uber’s legal obligation to ensure safety through measures like stringent background checks, monitoring, and safety features.

August 28, 2024:

• Status Conference Prepares for Key Discussions in Uber MDL: A joint status conference statement outlines several critical areas for discussion in the upcoming August 29th conference, including case filings, recent motions, proposals for amending complaints, discovery disputes, and settlement and case management strategies. The parties present differing views on handling complaint amendments and potential motions to dismiss, with plaintiffs favoring a selective approach and Uber advocating for a comprehensive resolution.

August 19, 2024:

• Uber Wins Partial Dismissal in Sexual Assault MDL: Judge Breyer temporarily reduces the scope of the master complaint in the Uber sexual assault MDL, dismissing product liability claims under California and Texas law. The judge found that the claims focused more on Uber’s operational practices than inherent design flaws in the app. However, the court allows other claims, such as negligence in service provision, to proceed and grants plaintiffs the opportunity to amend the master complaint.

The next Case Management Conference is scheduled for August 29, 2024, during which the parties will discuss the schedule for submitting and contesting amended legal documents. The outcome of this will determine whether the complaint can be successfully reframed to meet the court’s requirements. Even if not, the MDL remains a viable venue for pursuing these sexual abuse lawsuits.

August 8, 2024:

• RAINN Subpoena Upheld in Uber MDL: The court has ordered RAINN, the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network, to comply with a subpoena seeking documents related to its work with Uber on sexual misconduct and safety procedures. RAINN’s objections to the subpoena, citing its broad scope, were overruled by a federal judge. This ruling represents a significant development in the ongoing Uber driver sexual assault MDL, as it allows plaintiffs’ attorneys to access potentially valuable information about Uber’s safety practices and its collaboration with RAINN.

August 5, 2024:

• Court Sets Deposition Guidelines in Uber MDL: The magistrate judge in the Uber class action MDL issues an order establishing deposition guidelines, addressing deposition caps, duration, and procedures for handling document authenticity challenges.

August 1, 2024:

• Uber Sexual Assault Cases Surge: The Uber Passenger Sexual Assault MDL experiences a significant increase, with active cases growing from 321 to 387 in July.

July 31, 2024:

• Lyft Reaches Settlement in Shareholder Sex Abuse Lawsuit: Lyft and investor plaintiffs file a motion for preliminary approval of a settlement agreement in the Lyft shareholder sex abuse lawsuits, which includes reforms to protect passengers from sexual predators.

July 25, 2024:

• Dallas Woman Files Uber Sex Abuse Lawsuit: A woman from Dallas files a new Uber driver sex abuse lawsuit in the MDL, alleging she was sexually assaulted during a ride.

July 22, 2024:

• Magistrate Judge Schedules Hearing for Deposition Protocols and Clawback Dispute in Uber MDL: The magistrate judge schedules a hearing to address proposed deposition protocols and a clawback dispute in the federal Uber MDL class action lawsuit. Key issues include potential time limits on depositions, the scope and number of witnesses, and the timing for determining the number of depositions. The court will also consider adopting a protocol for handling authentication and business record disputes.

July 19, 2024:

• Court Orders Uber to Produce Full Data on Sexual Assault and Misconduct Incidents: The magistrate judge orders Uber to produce data and documents related to all alleged incidents of sexual assault and misconduct from 2017 to 2020. This includes incidents falling under all twenty-one categories of sexual misconduct identified by Uber, not just the five most serious categories covered in the company’s 2019 and 2022 Safety Reports. The court rejected Uber’s argument that reports from the other sixteen categories were unreliable and should not be subject to discovery. The judge granted the plaintiffs’ request for data exports from Uber’s JIRA, Bliss, and Zendesk databases, with a deadline for compliance set for July 19th.

July 17, 2024:

• Court Sets Deadline for Uber Data Production: In anticipation of the upcoming status conference on July 18, the magistrate judge has ordered Uber to produce data and documents related to sexual assault and misconduct incidents by July 31, 2024. The court emphasizes transparency and expresses concerns about potential redactions in incident reports. The order also calls for discussion on resolving disputes over third-party subpoenas and search terms. Additionally, an update is expected on the plaintiffs’ identification of custodians for discovery.

July 10, 2024:

• Court Grants Plaintiffs Access to Safety Incident Data: In a pivotal ruling, the court grants plaintiffs access to specific documents and data regarding safety incidents, including GPS data and trip details. This information is crucial for identifying patterns of sexual assault and misconduct and understanding Uber’s knowledge and response to such incidents. The court rejected Uber’s request for access to all 800,000 user reports, deeming it overly broad.

July 3, 2024:

• New Lawsuit Filed in Illinois: An Illinois woman files a new lawsuit alleging she was assaulted, harassed, or attacked by an Uber driver during a ride in Madison County, Illinois, on August 14, 2022.

July 1, 2024:

• Uber Passenger Sexual Assault MDL Grows: The Uber Passenger Sexual Assault MDL in California saw a 16% increase in active cases last month, rising from 276 lawsuits to 321.

June 27, 2024:

• Court of Appeal Upholds Ruling Impacting Non-California Uber Cases: The California Court of Appeal upheld a trial judge’s forum non conveniens order in Doe v. Uber Technologies, Inc., affecting non-California cases within the Judicial Council Coordinated Proceedings (JCCP). This ruling means that plaintiffs with non-California cases in the JCCP must file their cases within 60 days of the order’s date, or seek court approval for later filings.

May 30, 2024:

• New Lawsuit Filed: A California woman alleges she was sexually assaulted by her Uber driver during a ride. The lawsuit highlights a pattern of similar assaults and seeks to hold Uber accountable for passenger safety.

May 27, 2024:

• Case Management Conference Held: The court addressed procedural issues in the MDL, overseeing 297 cases and 395 additional lawsuits in California state courts. Key points of contention included:
  
  • Uber’s request to limit new case filings based on the outcome of a forum non conveniens appeal (opposed by plaintiffs)
    
  • Discovery progress, with debates over document production and retrieval methods
    
  • Uber’s request to begin written discovery from plaintiffs (opposed by plaintiffs due to potential trauma)

May 22, 2024:

• Judge Rejects Uber’s Forum Selection Clause: Uber’s attempt to block the consolidation of lawsuits using a clause in its terms of use was denied. The judge ruled such clauses cannot prevent MDL formation.

May 1, 2024:

• 12 New Cases Added to MDL: The total number of cases in the Uber sexual assault MDL has grown to 252.

April 27, 2024:

• Uber’s Multi-Pronged Attack on Lawsuits: On April 1st, Uber’s legal team launched a multi-pronged attack, filing motions to dismiss six separate lawsuits. Here’s a breakdown of their arguments:
  
  • State-Specific Challenges (California, Florida, Texas): Uber claims a prior class action settlement and unfair competition laws in these states render the lawsuits invalid. This tactic suggests Uber may believe some state laws offer them better legal footing.
    
  • Jurisdictional Dispute (Maryland Lawsuit): They argue the Maryland lawsuit, involving an assault outside the US, falls outside the court’s jurisdiction. This tactic highlights Uber’s attempt to potentially limit the scope of the MDL.
    
  • Weakness in Plaintiff Claims: Uber asserts the remaining motions target weaknesses in the plaintiffs’ legal arguments, suggesting they may be looking for technicalities to dismiss some cases.
    
• Upcoming Hearing: Judge Breyer has imposed a deadline for plaintiffs to counter Uber’s motions by April 30th (today). Uber then has until May 14th to offer a rebuttal. Following these exchanges, the court will hold a hearing to determine the fate of the dismissal requests.

April 16, 2024:

• Dispute Over Electronically Stored Information (ESI) Management: Disagreement arises on how to handle hyperlinked documents in emails during discovery. Plaintiffs argue for retrieving all versions of linked documents, while Uber proposes a manual retrieval process for specific requests.

April 12, 2024:

• Uber Introduces New Safety Features: In response to the lawsuits, Uber announces new passenger safety features like RideCheck monitoring, PIN verification, trip recording, and real-time trip sharing.

April 9, 2024:

• Shareholder Lawsuit Filed: A lawsuit alleges Uber misled investors by downplaying sexual assault reports, potentially inflating stock prices.

April 1, 2024:

• MDL Case Count Update: The number of cases in the Uber sexual assault MDL reaches 230, with 43 added since the year began.

March 22, 2024:

• Order Issued for Fact Sheets: The court establishes a format and timeline for exchanging plaintiff and defendant fact sheets in the MDL.

March 6, 2024:

• Judge Orders Uber to Produce Sexual Misconduct Investigation Documents: Uber is directed to provide documents related to government investigations into Uber driver sexual misconduct.

Why is talcum powder a hot topic now?

Talcum powder. That small plastic bottle we all have nestled among our bathroom essentials, right next to our lotions and soaps? It’s usually our go-to for keeping things dry and comfy, but recently, it’s been making headlines for reasons that are anything but comfortable.

It turns out that talcum powder is made from talc, and here’s where things get a bit sticky – talc can sometimes get cozy with asbestos in the ground. Both talc and asbestos are scooped up from the earth. Because they’re often neighbors underground, talc can get tainted with asbestos during the mining shuffle. Asbestos, while great for building materials, poses a real hazard when inhaled due to its link to serious diseases, like lung cancer and mesothelioma.

The science bit: Talc, asbestos, and health risks

Research on this is a bit of a mixed bag, but let’s lay it out: scientists have spotted tiny particles of talc hanging out in human tumors. Plus, whispers in the medical community suggest that using talcum powder for personal hygiene could bump up the risk of ovarian cancer. This has led to a slew of court cases with plaintiffs calling out big corporations for not cluing them in.

The American Cancer Society tells us that talcum powder is a mix of magnesium, silicon, and oxygen. Meanwhile, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of WHO, has flagged asbestos as a cancer-causing culprit, and that includes talc that’s been hanging out with asbestos.

The National Cancer Institute (cancer.gov) has also thrown in its two cents, suggesting a possible link between talc and ovarian cancer. This has sparked concerns since there’s a chance asbestos could be tagging along in some talc products. And nobody wants to breathe that in or apply it anywhere on their body.

To nip this in the bud, back in 1973, the FDA stepped up to the plate and started insisting that talcum powder be tested to make sure it’s asbestos-free.

Johnson & Johnson: Under the microscope

Johnson & Johnson, a name we all know, is feeling the heat. They found themselves in a bit of a pickle with traces of asbestos in their baby powder, leading to a hasty product recall. They insist their products are safe but are now shifting gears to cornstarch-based formulas in North America – kind of a “better safe than sorry” move.

The New Brunswick-based giant pulled their talc powders from the US and Canada markets in 2020, pointing to dwindling sales and choosing cornstarch instead. They’ve promised to wipe the slate clean of talc-based powders globally by year’s end.

Despite the investigations and lawsuits suggesting J&J knew about the asbestos risk and kept mum, they stand by their product’s safety. Still, they’re facing a mountain of cases – over 51,300 – and have earmarked a staggering $8.9 billion to settle these claims.

Where does that leave you?

If you’re a talcum powder user, you might be feeling a bit on edge. Here’s the gist: if you think your health woes might be tied to talcum powder, you’re not alone, and there could be a legal avenue open for you.

As of April 2023, J&J has set up a trust fund, planning to shell out over $12 billion to make amends to those affected by talcum powder-related cancers. If you or someone close has been hit with a diagnosis like ovarian cancer and you have a history with J&J’s talcum powder, there might be compensation on the table for you.

Bottom line: While talcum powder has been as familiar as an old friend, it’s important to stay in the know about what you’re using. With all the legal dust-ups, companies might just have to clear the air about what’s in their products.

Mass torts vs. class actions at a glance

When we’re talking about mass tort and class action lawsuits, we’re discussing two distinct legal approaches used to handle claims where many individuals are harmed by the same entity or event.

Mass tort lawsuits are a way to handle legal cases where many individuals have been harmed, but each person’s situation is distinct. Think of it like a neighborhood where every house has different damage after a storm. In a mass tort, each homeowner would file their own lawsuit, but because the storm is the common factor, the court groups the lawsuits together to manage them more efficiently. The key here is that each person retains their own case and has a say in how it’s settled, which reflects their unique damages.

In contrast, class action lawsuits and class action settlements bring people together under a single legal action. It’s as if the whole neighborhood decided to sue the storm together, with one or a few neighbors representing everyone’s interests. Here, individual control is limited. The representative, known as the lead plaintiff, along with their legal team, makes decisions that affect the entire group. When it comes to the payout, it’s typically split evenly, or based on a formula that applies to all members.

What’s best for you?

Let’s quickly sum up the main points to help you decide which legal route could work better for your situation:

• Control: More personal control in mass torts; limited control in class actions.
• Compensation: Individualized in mass torts; uniform in class actions.
• Applicability: Mass torts fit for varied individual damages; class actions for uniform damages across the group.
• Efficiency: Class actions can be quicker and use fewer resources by combining claims.

So, if you’re part of a group that’s been wronged and you’re thinking about legal action, consider these points. Do you need to maintain control over your case, or are you okay with a representative taking the lead? Do your damages require individual attention, or are they similar enough to others to share in a collective claim? Your answers will help determine whether a mass tort or a class action is the best route for your situation.