In a closely watched decision, a California jury found Uber not liable for a sexual assault allegedly committed by one of its drivers, even though the company was found negligent in some of its safety practices.
The case, tried in San Francisco Superior Court, involved a woman identified as Jessica C., who claimed she was attacked by her Uber driver in 2016. Her lawsuit was chosen as the first “bellwether trial” among more than 500 similar cases consolidated in California, with thousands more pending in federal court (Reuters).
The Jury’s Decision
Jurors concluded that while Uber failed to implement certain reasonable safety measures, the company’s negligence was not a “substantial factor” in causing the plaintiff’s harm. As a result, Uber was cleared of liability.
The plaintiff’s attorneys had sought damages that could have reached millions of dollars over her lifetime, citing ongoing trauma. Uber argued that it cannot be held responsible for criminal conduct by independent contractors, pointing to background checks and safety improvements as evidence of diligence.
Uber’s Broader Safety Record
The lawsuits against Uber allege the company ignored a widespread problem with sexual assaults during rides. Critics note that Uber long withheld key statistics and failed to adopt preventive measures such as assigning female riders to female drivers or mandating in-car cameras.
Uber highlights reforms designed to address these issues:
- In-app ride verification and anomaly detection
- Optional audio and video recording features
- Partnerships with advocacy groups supporting survivors
- A Safety Advisory Board led by former Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson
- A $10 million “Driving Change” initiative to combat gender-based violence
According to Uber’s own U.S. Safety Report, serious sexual assault reports fell by 44% between 2017–2018 and 2021–2022. While this shows progress, thousands of incidents remain documented.
Why This Trial Matters for Assault Claims
Legally, this ruling underscores the difficulty of proving corporate liability in assault cases involving third parties. Under U.S. tort law, plaintiffs must demonstrate that a company’s negligence directly caused their harm. In this case, even though Uber was negligent, the jury decided that negligence was not the proximate cause of the assault.
This outcome has several implications:
- Higher Burden of Proof – Future plaintiffs must draw a clear causal link between Uber’s policies and the assault.
- Legislative Pressure – Lawmakers may respond by pushing for stronger safety mandates on rideshare companies.
- Settlement Leverage – Because this was a bellwether case, the verdict could affect how Uber approaches settlement talks in the thousands of remaining lawsuits.
The decision also resonates beyond ridesharing. Businesses such as hotels, nightclubs, and universities often face lawsuits alleging they failed to prevent assaults on their premises. This case reinforces the challenge of holding corporations accountable for third-party criminal acts unless a direct policy failure can be proven.
Broader Social and Political Context
The ruling comes amid heightened scrutiny of rideshare safety. Following investigative reporting by the New York Times, a U.S. House subcommittee has demanded that Uber release more details about its safety protocols. Advocacy groups warn that decisions like this could deter victims from pursuing claims unless stronger accountability frameworks are enacted.
Final Takeaway
The Uber verdict illustrates the complexities of assault claims when corporate defendants are involved. Victims face steep hurdles in proving negligence is a direct cause of their injuries, and this case could set a precedent favoring corporations in civil assault litigation.
For those seeking justice after an assault, experienced legal counsel is crucial. If you or someone you know has been harmed, contact an Assult Lawyer in San Antonio, TX to understand your options and protect your rights.
