This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Litigation

Nov. 26, 2015

Third hearing on class size in Uber driver's suit yields little progress

At a hearing Wednesday in a potentially precedent setting case for the gig economy the defense attorney representing Uber put forward what at times appeared to be a counterintuitive set of arguments, saying the class of drivers suing the on-demand ride service provider deserved a better representative

By Phil Johnson
Daily Journal Staff Writer

SAN FRANCISCO - At a hearing Wednesday in a potentially precedent-setting case, the defense attorney representing Uber Technologies Inc. put forward what at times appeared to be an unusual argument that the class of drivers suing the on-demand ride service provider deserved a better representative.

Uber's attorney Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., a partner at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, argued again...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?

Enewsletter Sign-up