Two weeks ago, U.S. District Judge Edward Chen granted class status to a group of drivers suing Uber. The drivers allege that Uber misclassifies them as independent contractors when they are in fact employees and entitled to employee benefits.

While the ruling itself is news worthy (we covered it here), so too was Judge Chen’s handling of the lawyers, indicating that neither Uber nor the drivers have an easy road ahead of them.

When slapping down Uber’s legal arguments, Judge Chen didn’t pull any punches. His extensive, detailed opinion focused largely on whether the drivers met the predominance requirements for a class action suit – whether, that is, common questions of law and fact predominated over individualized claims.

In refusing to grant any slack to Uber, Judge Chen reminds us of another N.D. Cal judge, Judge Lucy Koh. You may remember Judge Koh as the federal judge who asked Apple’s attorney if he was “smoking crack” during one of the company’s many lawsuits against Samsung. Or perhaps Judge Koh stands out better as the judge who rejected a paltry settlement between tech workers and Silicon Valley companies over the companies’ anti-poaching agreement. Koh’s ability to shut down tech darlings had FindLaw calling her “the most powerful woman in Silicon Valley” at the time. We’re seeing echoes of Koh in Judge Chen’s treatment of Uber.

Plaintiffs Don’t Get Off Easy Either

If Uber’s lawyers have it bad, Shannon Liss-Riordan, the attorney representing the drivers, isn’t getting off easily either. Liss-Riordan is a class action lawyer who previously won big for FedEx drivers and strippers (there was little overlap in the plaintiffs). She’s been waging a high-profile attack on tech’s classification of workers as independent contractors, suing not just Uber but also Lyft and even traditional cab companies in Boston.

Uber had argued, half-heartedly, that Liss-Riordan was inadequate to represent the drivers. She was, according to the company, “over extended because of the multitude of cases she is currently prosecuting against Uber and similar firms.” While rejecting that argument, Judge Chen did note that it “shares Uber’s concern at least in theory, and advises Ms. Liss-Riordan to focus considerable time and attention on this case now that it has been certified.” Not that we’d imagine Liss-Riordan shirking off a billion dollar class action for a sabbatical in the Cote d’Azur anyway.

Related Resources:

  • A Federal Judge Just Shredded Uber’s Arguments Against a Major Class-Action Lawsuit (Slate)
  • Cal Labor Commission Says Uber Drivers are Employees (FindLaw’s California Case Law)
  • Uber ‘Gratuity’ Lawsuit Can Move Forward, Federal Judge Rules (FindLaw’s California Case Law)
  • Lyft and Sidecar Legal in California Under New Regulations (FindLaw’s California Case Law)

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Civil Rights

Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court

Criminal

Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records

Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules