Suing the Driver and Uber: Who a Survivor's Lawsuit Names

Two Defendants, Two Different Questions

When a rider alleges that an Uber driver sexually assaulted them, the lawsuit that follows often names two defendants: the driver and Uber Technologies. That pairing confuses people. Survivors reasonably ask why a company belongs in a case about something one person allegedly did.

The two claims ask different questions. The claim against the driver is about the driver’s own alleged conduct during the ride. The claims against Uber are about the company’s alleged choices before that ride ever started, including how it screened drivers and which safety measures it did or did not put in place.

A court or jury can treat those allegations separately. Knowing the difference explains a good deal of what has happened in this litigation so far.

A Recent Filing Names Both

A recent CBS News report described a Cicero woman who filed a lawsuit against both Uber and the driver she accuses of sexually assaulting her. Filings like that one tend to follow a familiar shape. The complaint makes allegations about the driver’s conduct, then a second set of allegations about what Uber allegedly knew, did, or failed to do.

Nothing in a complaint is a finding. A lawsuit states what the plaintiff alleges and what they will try to prove, and the defendants have the right to respond. Uber generally denies the allegations made against it in these cases.

We do not name survivors on this site, including survivors whose names appear in public court records.

The Claim Against the Driver

A claim against the driver usually rests on the alleged assault itself. In civil law that is typically pleaded as battery or a related intentional tort, and the Legal Information Institute at Cornell Law School has plain-language entries explaining those terms.

Two points surprise many survivors.

• A civil claim does not generally depend on a criminal charge or conviction. Civil cases use a different standard of proof, and many go forward where no criminal case was ever filed.
• Many survivors did not report to police right away, or at all. That alone does not generally rule out a civil claim, though deadlines and rules vary by state.

Naming the driver also keeps the person accused of the conduct inside the case, which matters when the facts of the ride are disputed.

The Claims Against Uber Focus on the Company

The allegations against Uber look different. In the federal and California proceedings, plaintiffs generally allege that the company’s own decisions made assaults by drivers more likely or harder to prevent. Those allegations have included claims about:

• How Uber ran background checks on drivers, and what those checks allegedly missed
• Which safety features Uber allegedly delayed or declined to adopt
• What Uber allegedly told riders about safety, and what it allegedly left out
• How Uber allegedly handled earlier complaints about specific drivers

Uber disputes these allegations. Recent coverage, including a Forbes report on a lawsuit accusing Uber of covering up sexual assault numbers, shows how much of the fight concerns what the company knew and when. A court has not resolved those questions.

Our position is simple, and survivors should hear it plainly. The claims against Uber rest on their own allegations about the company. A driver who was never charged or cannot be located does not, by itself, end the question of whether a survivor can bring a claim against Uber.

Uber’s Position on Drivers

Uber has long described its drivers as independent contractors rather than employees. That position matters here, because the rules for holding a company responsible for another person’s conduct often turn on the relationship between the two.

Plaintiffs have answered with theories that look at how the relationship appears to a rider, and at the duties a company may owe when it sells rides to the public. How those theories apply depends on the court and, in many cases, on state law.

This remains one of the most contested questions in the litigation. Survivors do not have to resolve it before asking about a claim.

What the Trials Have Shown So Far

The results have been mixed, and survivors deserve the losses alongside the wins.

• September 2025: Uber won the first California state-court trial.
• February 2026: a federal bellwether jury in Phoenix returned an $8.5 million verdict for the plaintiff.
• April 2026: a jury in Charlotte returned a $5,000 verdict for the plaintiff.
• October 2026: a Texas bellwether case settled before opening statements.

Bellwether trials test how juries respond to evidence that recurs across many cases. They do not decide anyone else’s claim, and none of the results above predicts what will happen in a different survivor’s case. The distance between the Phoenix and Charlotte figures alone shows how far apart two juries can land.

The federal judiciary publishes general information about how civil cases move through federal court, including the pretrial stages these cases are in.

Where These Cases Are Heard

Federal Uber cases are coordinated in MDL 3084 before Judge Charles R. Breyer in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. California state-court cases are coordinated separately in JCCP 5188. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation decides when federal cases are centralized, and that step organizes pretrial work. It does not find that Uber did anything wrong.

Lyft claims are coordinated separately in MDL 3171. If you were assaulted by a Lyft driver, you can still ask NuLegal for a review.

What You Do Not Need to Have Figured Out

People hold back from asking about a claim because they think they need more than they have. You do not need:

• The driver’s full name. Uber’s trip records tie each ride to a driver account.
• A police report or a criminal case.
• The exact date, as long as you can describe roughly when the ride happened.
• A theory about what Uber did wrong. That is what the investigation and the records are for.

If you have them, a few things help: the email receipt for the ride, the account you booked with, any medical or counseling visits afterward, and the names of anyone you told.

Filing deadlines vary by state and can be short. That is the strongest reason not to wait for more trial results before asking.

Take the Next Step

If an Uber or Lyft driver sexually assaulted you, you can ask NuLegal for a free, confidential review through our free case review form. You can read more about these claims on our Uber and Lyft sexual assault page. A review does not commit you to filing, and you decide what you share and when.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention keeps public information on sexual violence and on finding support, whether or not you ever pursue a claim.

If you are in danger right now, call 911. The National Sexual Assault Hotline is free and confidential at 800-656-HOPE (4673) or online.rainn.org.