WebApr 15, 2016 · Cotter v. Lyft is a federal class action in the Northern District of California brought by attorneys Shannon Liss-Riordan and Matthew Carlson on behalf of California Lyft drivers challenging Lyft’s classification of the drivers as independent contractors. The lawsuit also seeks benefits, expense reimbursements and other damages. WebNo. 94; Cotter v. Lyft, Inc., 60 F. Supp. 3d 1067 (N.D. Cal. 2015). The Court explained that although Cotter and Maciel were like independent contractors in some ways (for example, they could control their own schedules), they were like employees in other ways (for

Sisters’ Camelot - Harvard Law Review

WebMar 19, 2015 · The Lyft Driver Class Action Lawsuit is Cotter, et al. v. Lyft Inc., Case No. 3:13-cv-04065, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The Uber Driver Class Action Lawsuit is O’Connor v. Uber Technologies Inc., Case No. 3:13-cv-03826-EMC in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District Court of California. WebCotter v. Lyft, Inc., Court Case No. 3:13-cv-04065-YGR in the California Northern District Court. Cotter v. Lyft, Inc., Court Case No. 3:13-cv-04065-YGR in the California Northern … fame innowa

Motion to Approve PAGA Settlement in California - Trellis

WebThe Court held that the California Labor Code applies to overtime work “performed in California,” id. at 1206, 127 Cal.Rptr.3d 185, 254 P.3d 237, but that California law did not, at least on the facts of that case, “apply to overtime work performed outside California for a California-based employer by out-of-state plaintiffs.”. WebInc. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal. 5th 903, 959–61 (2024). That test is obviously met here: Lyft drivers provide services that are squarely within the usual course of the company’s business, and Lyft’s argument to the contrary is frivolous. See Cotter, 60 F. Supp. 3d at 1078; see also Namisak v. Uber Technologies, Inc. convolutions and pooling