Goncharov

Goncharov v. Uber Techs., Inc.

Good Law
19 Cal. App. 5th 1157·229 Cal. Rptr. 3d 3
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 29, 2018A149347California6,770 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Margulies, J.

*1161 Plaintiffs Leonid Goncharov, Mohammed Eddine, Alan Freberg, Trevor Johnson, Peter Kirby, and Jeremy Watt filed a putative class action lawsuit against Uber Technologies, Inc. (Uber) for providing unlicensed transportation services that appropriated passengers and income from licensed taxicab drivers. In the second amended complaint (SAC), plaintiffs alleged Uber failed to comply with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) licensing requirements for charter-party carriers. Uber filed a demurrer, claiming the court lacked jurisdiction under Public Utilities Code 1 section 1759 due to ongoing rulemaking by the CPUC and asserting the SAC failed to state a claim as to all causes of action. Plaintiffs asserted the court had denied these arguments in connection with Uber's demurrer to the first amended complaint and lacked jurisdiction to reconsider these issues without a proper motion under Code of Civil Procedure section 1008. Plaintiffs also contested the substantive arguments raised by Uber. The trial court took judicial notice of various documents associated with the CPUC rulemaking and sustained the demurrer with leave to amend. Plaintiffs declined to amend, and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.