Who's Suing Uber Now?: Lyft Drivers
It's one thing for Uber Technologies to get sued by its competitors. It's another for the embattled ride-hailing company to get sued by its drivers. But in a new class action filed in federal court in San Francisco, Uber is getting sued on behalf of its competitor's drivers.
April 25, 2017 at 06:13 PM
3 minute read
SAN FRANCISCO — It's one thing for Uber Technologies Inc. to get sued by its competitors. It's another for the embattled ride-hailing company to get sued by its drivers. But in a new class action filed in federal court in San Francisco, Uber is getting sued on behalf of its competitor's drivers.
Lawyers at Audet & Partners in San Francisco and Zimmerman Reed in Manhattan Beach sued Uber on Monday, claiming that the company created spyware to track drivers providing rides on the rival platform run by Lyft Inc.
The complaint, which draws heavily from an April 12 report in The Information, claims that Uber designed a software-based program code-named “Hell” that used fake Lyft accounts to track how many Lyft drivers were on the road and where they were at any given time. The complaint block-quotes more than two dozen paragraphs from the original news story and claims that Uber violated the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act and the California Invasion of Privacy Act. Those laws carry statutory penalties of thousands of dollars per individual violation.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Pharmacies Accuse GoodRx of 'Inviting Price-Fixing' in Series of Antitrust Class Actions
4 minute read
'No Evidence'?: Big Law Firms Defend Academic Publishers in EDNY Antitrust Case
3 minute read
Old Laws, New Tricks: Lawyers Using Patchwork of Creative Legal Theories to Target New Tech
Trending Stories
- 1'I've Worked Until 2 in the Morning': Lawyers Brace for Trump Policy
- 2Trial Begins for Man Accused of Killing Ga. Nursing Student Laken Riley
- 3'It's Not About Speed': Forging Strong Legal Department-Law Firm Relationships Starts With Humility, Trust
- 4Benworth Accused of Predatory Tactics in Foreclosure Dispute as Elderly Defendant's Health Deteriorates
- 5Tom Girardi's Lawyers Want Next Month's Sentencing Delayed
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
