Uber is set to defend itself in a second federal jury trial beginning Tuesday in Charlotte, North Carolina, where a woman alleges she was sexually assaulted by a driver she engaged through the company's app. The proceeding, scheduled to run roughly three weeks, comes after a separate trial produced an $8.5 million compensatory verdict that has raised questions about the broader exposure the company faces.
Both the Charlotte case and the earlier trial in Arizona are being treated as bellwether test cases for mass litigation that has been consolidated in federal court. The outcomes in these representative cases are expected to help establish how remaining claims might be valued in any global settlement or otherwise resolved.
The plaintiff in the North Carolina case says that shortly before 2 a.m. in March 2019, after reaching her Raleigh destination, her Uber driver grabbed her inner thigh and asked if he could "keep it with him," which the woman says prompted her to flee the vehicle. Uber has not denied that the incident occurred, according to court filings, but the company contends it is a software company rather than a "common carrier" such as a taxi service, and therefore does not owe the same legal duties to protect passengers under North Carolina law.
Even if the plaintiff persuades a jury that a different legal duty exists, Uber argues it is not liable for the actions of an independent contractor. The status of drivers as employees or independent contractors - a classification with wide-ranging legal consequences - has been the subject of prolonged litigation and regulatory debate for Uber in the United States and internationally. That issue remains unresolved across multiple forums and is at the center of parts of the mass litigation.
The North Carolina trial will be overseen by U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, who normally sits in San Francisco and is managing the federal litigation brought against Uber. In a statement issued Friday, an Uber spokesperson said the specific incident at issue in the Charlotte trial was never reported to the company or to law enforcement, and only emerged when the plaintiff filed her lawsuit.
"Sexual assault is a horrific crime that we take incredibly seriously. We remain focused on investing in the technology, policies, and partnerships that strengthen safety, help prevent harm, and support survivors," the spokesperson said in the statement. Lawyers for the plaintiff did not respond to a request for comment, according to court records.
The earlier bellwether trial involved an Oklahoma resident who alleged that during a 2023 ride in Arizona she was harassed and then raped by an Uber driver. In that case a jury in February found the driver to be an agent of Uber, holding the company responsible for his conduct, and awarded the plaintiff $8.5 million in compensatory damages while declining to impose punitive damages. The plaintiff's attorneys had sought more than $140 million in damages.
Following that verdict, Uber has asked Judge Breyer to set aside the jury's decision or to grant a new trial. The company also faces more than 500 additional cases in California state courts that make similar claims. In September, Uber prevailed in the only state-court trial to reach a verdict so far in California, where a jury concluded that while the company had not implemented measures that would have protected the plaintiff, its negligence was not a substantial factor in causing her harm.
The twin bellwether trials - the one underway in Charlotte and the earlier Arizona case - are being watched closely by plaintiffs and defendants alike. Their results could influence settlement negotiations or litigation strategy for the thousands of other plaintiffs who have filed similar suits. More than 3,300 such lawsuits are now consolidated in federal court, reflecting the scale of claims the company is confronting.
As the Charlotte jury trial proceeds, the legal questions at issue will focus on the nature and extent of Uber's duties to riders under state law and whether the company's contractual and platform structure insulates it from liability for acts committed by drivers classified as independent contractors. The proceedings will not only test fact-specific allegations of harm but will also probe legal doctrines that could shape outcomes across hundreds or thousands of related cases.
Summary of the case
The plaintiff alleges a March 2019 assault after an Uber ride in Raleigh. Uber contends the incident was not reported to the company or law enforcement and argues it is a technology provider, not a common carrier, and that the driver was an independent contractor. The trial is one of two bellwether cases examining liability and potential damages exposure across consolidated litigation involving more than 3,300 suits in federal court and over 500 related state cases in California.