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...

Torts/Personal Injury

Jun. 10, 2024

Court rules background checks are not required for Lyft passengers

The Court applied the sliding scale of foreseeability factors from the California Supreme Court cases of Rowland v. Christian and Ann M. v. Pacific Plaza Shopping Center, which balance the likelihood of third-party criminal acts against the burden and efficacy of the proposed security measures.

Shutterstock

A rideshare passenger with a criminal history stabs his Lyft driver. The driver survives but suffers serious stab wounds. He sues Lyft, arguing that the company has a duty to prevent foreseeable attacks like the one he experienced. Lyft counters that, under California Supreme Court precedent, the isolated attack was not foreseeable enough to compel Lyft to take burdensome measures to prevent third-party attacks.

Who’s right? That was the s...

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?