Most Innovative Public Company Legal Department of the Year Finalist: Lyft
"Lyft's growth and expansion has been astronomic over the last 18 months, and the legal team has been uncompromising in its ability to help the company achieve business goals and take us closer and closer to realizing our mission," says general counsel Kristin Sverchek.
October 31, 2019 at 07:30 AM
4 minute read
To say it was a busy year for the lawyers at ride-hailing company Lyft would be a gross understatement. The Lyft legal team led the company to an industry-first IPO, navigated the acquisition of bike-sharing company Motivate, and won a legal battle against SFMTA, which led to the launch of its new dockless bikes in San Francisco. Lyft was a finalist for Most Innovative Public Company Legal Department of the Year as part of the California Leaders in Tech Law and Innovation Awards. Lyft general counsel Kristin Sverchek recently shared how her team managed such a momentous year.
What are the distinguishing characteristics of Lyft's in-house legal department and the lawyers and staff that make it up?
Kristin Sverchek: Lyft's growth and expansion has been astronomic over the last 18 months, and the legal team has been uncompromising in its ability to help the company achieve business goals and take us closer and closer to realizing our mission. To be on Lyft's legal team requires the ability to scale just as quickly as the business does—constantly reviewing and up-leveling processes and work to match the increasing complexity of the business, the sophistication of our partners and the challenges we meet as we expand our transportation offerings into cities across North America.
Because of that, Lyft's legal team deals with disparate practice areas—personal injury, regulatory, intellectual property, employment, disability law and privacy, just to name a few. It's an extremely well-rounded team that can handle a multitude of complex legal issues.
What was the biggest challenge your in-house team faced in the past year and how did you overcome it?
When the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) refused to comply with its obligations pursuant to Lyft's contract to be the exclusive bike-share system in San Francisco:
Lyft closed its acquisition of Motivate, the bike-share system, in December 2018. And as part of this acquisition, Lyft also acquired a number of exclusive city contracts that make it the only bike-share system in a number of cities. However, when the SFMTA challenged its contract, Lyft's litigation team filed a suit to block the city from granting bike permits to other companies, including Lyft's primary competitors. Lyft won the case in San Francisco Superior Court, which led to Lyft launching their new dockless bikes in the city. The legal team's victory was a huge step towards unlocking new modes of transportation across North America—a key part of growth for the company as we continue down our journey as a public company.
Besides that challenge, what was your legal department's most significant accomplishment of the past year and why?
Becoming the first major tech company to IPO in 2019:
Lyft started preparing for its IPO in summer 2018, and officially kicked off the process that fall. Lyft's corporate team led the project, including drafting the S-1, working with underwriters' counsel on diligence, staying up to date on hot-button issues for the SEC, and managing all communications with Lyft's CFO and CEO. To make matters more complicated was a record 35-day government shutdown and Lyft's main competitor filing their S-1 on the exact same day. Of note, Lyft's S-1 had far fewer comments in general compared to the competition. And ultimately, Lyft still went public within the originally planned time frame due to the corporate team's deep experience and exceptional draft registration statements.
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
© 2025 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 AllKraken’s Chief Legal Officer Exits, Eyes Role in Trump Administration
3 minute readCollectible Maker Funko Wins Motion to Dismiss Securities Class Action
How Tony West Used Transparency to Reform Uber's Toxic Culture
Trending Stories
- 1Law Firms Expand Scope of Immigration Expertise, Amid Blitz of Trump Orders
- 2Latest Boutique Combination in Florida Continues Am Law 200 Merger Activity
- 3Sarno da Costa D’Aniello Maceri LLC Announces Addition of New Office in Eatontown, NJ, and Named Partner
- 4Friday Newspaper
- 5Public Notices/Calendars
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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