O'Connor v. Uber Technologies, Inc.
United States District Court for the Northern District of California
82 F. Supp. 3d 1133 (2015)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Upon being hired, drivers for Uber Technologies, Inc. (defendant) signed a contract with Uber stating that the drivers were independent contractors. Uber drivers used their own vehicles and were required under the contract to dress professionally. Drivers were paid a fee for each ride they completed. The passenger’s fare—which was set unilaterally by Uber—was paid directly to Uber, and Uber then passed the fee onto the driver. Generally, drivers were permitted to drive as much or as little as they wanted, although the Uber handbook stated the expectation that drivers accept all ride requests when logged in. The handbook also covered when to send the passenger a text message pre-ride, what types of radio stations to play, and other specifics of the job. Uber claimed that these specifics were merely suggestions. O’Connor (plaintiff) brought a putative class action on behalf of Uber drivers, seeking a judgment that the drivers were Uber employees. Uber argued that drivers were independent contractors. The parties disputed whether Uber could terminate drivers at will. Uber filed a motion for summary judgment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Chen, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
