Cotter

Cotter v. Lyft, Inc.

Good Law
60 F. Supp. 3d 1067·2015 WL 1062407·24 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 964·80 Cal. Comp. Cases 329·2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30026
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 11, 2015Case No. 13-cv-04065-VCCalifornia7,150 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Chhabria, J.

Re: Dkt. Nos. 69,

ORDER DENYING CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

I.

The question in this case 'is whether Lyft drivers are “employees” or “independent contractors” under California law. The answer is of great consequence for the drivers, because the California Legislature has conferred many protections on employees, while independent contractors receive virtually none. The answer is also of great import to Lyft, because its business model assumes the drivers are independent contractors.

At first glance, Lyft drivers don’t seem much like employees. We generally understand an employee to be someone who works under the direction of a supervisor, for an extended or indefinite period of time, with fairly regular hours, receiving most or all his income from that one employer (or perhaps two employers). Lyft drivers can work as little or as much as they want, and can schedule their driving around their other activities. A person might treat driving for Lyft as a side activity, to be fit into his schedule when time permits and when he needs a little extra income.

But Lyft drivers don’t seem much like independent contractors either. We generally understand an independent…

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.