Skip to content 
Uber Technologies Inc. is facing accusations in a California courtroom that it vastly underreported sexual assaults committed by its drivers and failed to implement policies that could have protected riders from harm. The allegations were presented to a San Francisco jury during opening statements in the first bellwether trial of a larger coordinated litigation effort involving hundreds of survivors, Bloomberg Law reported yesterday.
A plaintiff’s attorney told the jury that Uber operated on a business model where riders were treated as “demand” and drivers as “supply,” and that anything threatening that model—including safety reforms—was rejected. The attorney said sexual violence reports rose significantly as a result.
The lawsuit is one of 600 claims consolidated in California Superior Court before Judge Ethan P. Schulman. The trial, which is expected to last the entire month, represents the first test case. The outcome could set the tone for future settlements or verdicts. Meanwhile, a parallel set of Uber sexual assault lawsuits is proceeding in federal court as part of a multidistrict litigation (MDL) involving more than 2,500 lawsuits, with the first test trial in that MDL scheduled to begin in January 2026.
The bellwether case centers on a 2016 incident involving a then-18-year-old college student, identified in court documents as Jessica C. She was riding to the San Jose airport when her Uber driver allegedly pulled over, turned off the app, and forcibly groped and kissed her. According to her attorney, he also restrained her by her hair and tried to remove her pants before she escaped by pretending her parents were tracking her location. Jessica later developed PTSD and dropped out of college.
In court, her attorney criticized Uber’s 2019 transparency report, which publicly acknowledged just under 6,000 sexual assaults over 2017 and 2018. However, the attorney said that figure was misleading because Uber excluded 16 additional categories of sexual misconduct, including verbal threats and acts like masturbation. The true number of reports, according to the plaintiff’s legal team, was closer to 71,000 in 2017 and 95,000 in 2018.
The plaintiff’s attorney also said Uber declined to launch internal safety programs like audio and video recording that were recommended in internal documents as deterrents to assault. Though California law already mandates such technology in taxis and buses, Uber opted against using it in rideshare vehicles.
Uber’s defense attorney told the jury that the company performs extensive background checks, uses real-time GPS tracking, and has improved its safety protocols over time. She said Jessica’s case involved inconsistencies in her retelling of the incident and noted that the driver involved had no criminal record. She emphasized that out of billions of rides, serious incidents represent a small fraction. “It’s five times more likely to be struck by lightning than to be sexually assaulted in an Uber,” the attorney told the jury.
Despite these claims, plaintiffs argue that Uber has failed to meet the legal standard of exercising the highest duty of care in protecting passengers from foreseeable harm.
If you or someone you love was sexually assaulted during an Uber ride, you are not alone, and you may have legal options. SurvivorsRights.com is here to help you understand your rights and connect you with experienced legal professionals. Visit our Uber lawsuit resource page and fill out our confidential form to have your case evaluated at no cost to you.
