Lyft Settles SF's Demand for Driver Data
Under the new agreement, traffic experts and law enforcement officials can view the data so long as the city shields the information from public disclosure.
February 14, 2018 at 04:11 PM
4 minute read
Lyft car (Photo: Jason Doiy/ALM)
Lyft Inc. has reached an agreement with San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera to share information about driver practices and the services the ride-hailing company offers to disabled passengers and low-income neighborhoods.
Herrera's office subpoenaed four years of records from Lyft and rival Uber Technologies Inc. last June, arguing the city needs the data to analyze how the companies affect traffic congestion and pedestrian safety and whether they're complying with state and local laws. An estimated 45,000 drivers for both companies pick up passengers in San Francisco, according to the city.
Lyft and Uber initially challenged the subpoenas, citing a threat to their trade secrets. Lyft later handed over many of the records the city sought, but the company would only allow them to be seen by attorneys. Under the new agreement, traffic experts and law enforcement officials can view the data so long as the city shields the information from public disclosure.
“It's always our desire to work with cities in which we operate and, after receiving sufficient assurances from the city attorney that the data will be kept confidential and secure, we have reached a resolution … permitting limited sharing of the data within city government only,” Lyft spokeswoman Chelsea Harrison said in a statement.
Uber, represented by Davis Wright Tremaine, continues to fight Herrera's administrative subpoena. The company in December appealed a San Francisco Superior Court order to turn over the records to the First District Court of Appeal.
“I want to commend Lyft for being sensible during this process and ultimately doing the right thing,” Herrera said in a statement. “I cannot say the same for Uber.”
“For a company that is supposedly changing its culture, thumbing your nose at the law is a funny way of showing that you're now a good corporate citizen,” Herrera said.
An Uber spokesman said in a statement the company shares “all required data with our regulators in California to ensure compliance with the law. We will continue working with the city of San Francisco on a pilot project to share Uber trip data.”
San Francisco city officials have often sparred with the city's hometown ride-hailing companies, usually with similar results: Lyft will settle after a brief skirmish, while Uber historically digs in for a protracted battle. In 2016, Uber agreed to pay up to $25 million to settle litigation brought by San Francisco and Los Angeles for making misleading claims about its driver background checks. Lyft settled similar claims in 2014 for $500,000.
In this case, Herrera is asking the companies to reveal how many miles and hours their drivers log in the city as well as whether they offer drivers any incentives to commute to San Francisco from outside the region. The city is also seeking records that show which neighborhoods the companies serve and whether they offer rides to passengers who have disabilities.
Read more:
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 AllBlake Lively's claims that movie co-star launched smear campaign gets support in publicist's suit
4 minute readSolana Labs Co-Founder Allegedly Pocketed Ex-Wife’s ‘Millions of Dollars’ of Crypto Gains
4 minute readThe end of the 'Rust' criminal case against Alec Baldwin may unlock a civil lawsuit
Trending Stories
- 1Paxton's 2024 Agenda: Immigration, Climate, Transgender Issues, Social Media, Abortion, Elections
- 2Let’s Hear It One Last Time!: One More Bow for 2024’s Litigators of the Week
- 3Bottoming Out or Merging Up? Law Firms That Shuttered in 2024
- 492 Nursing Homes, Left Out of NYS Funding for Ongoing Capital Expenses, File Federal Lawsuit
- 5Friday Newspaper
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