Doe

Doe v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 22, 20193:19-cv-03310California5,058 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

BACKGROUND

22 A. Complaint Allegations 23 On August 14, 2018, Jane Doe asked her boyfriend to call an Uber for her as Doe’s phone 24 had low battery. (Complaint at ¶ 49.) Doe’s boyfriend was not with her, so she did not know 25 which driver Uber had assigned to pick her up. (Id.) The car that approached Doe had an Uber 26 27 1 decal on the car’s windshield. (Id. at ¶ 50.) Doe got into the car because she saw the Uber decal 2 and “she believed, perhaps mistakenly, that the driver said her boyfriend’s name when she 3 approached the car.” (Id.) After she entered the vehicle, the driver activated the child-proof locks 4 on the car’s doors, drove to a remote location, and raped and partially strangled Jane Doe. (Id. at ¶ 5 46.) The assailant then began to drive to another location, but Doe escaped and was rescued by a 6 passing motorist. (Id.) 7 Months before Doe’s assault, Uber had learned that the assailant, while an authorized Uber 8 driver, had behaved disturbingly while giving another woman a ride in an Uber. (Id. at ¶ 52.) 9 Upon investigation, the assailant told Uber that he had driven the passenger off her route, flirted 10 with her, 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.