fbpx

Shikha v. Lyft, Inc 

Case Details and Video Transcript:

Filed 5/17/24 

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION 

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT 

DIVISION THREE ABDU LKADER AL SHIKHA, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. LYFT, INC., Defendant and Respondent. B321882 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 20STCV14928) 

A Lyft driver, Al Shikha, sued Lyft for negligence after being attacked by a passenger with a criminal record. Shikha argued that Lyft should perform criminal background checks on all passengers, not just the drivers.

The trial court granted Lyft’s motion for judgment on the pleadings finding that Lyft did not have a legal duty to conduct background checks on passengers. Al Shikha appealed.

The California Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s decision. It held that Al Shikha failed to show that Lyft’s legal duty to its drivers extends to performing criminal background checks on passengers. In addition to noting that such a duty would be highly burdensome and not necessarily prevent attacks on drivers, the appellate court also reasoned that the foreseeability riders attacking drivers was not sufficiently high to impose this duty on Lyft. 

Thank you for watching and remember to follow us for news on the latest case law affecting California attorneys.

More Videos

Herzog v. Sup. Ct

Case Details and Video Transcript: Filed 5/16/24 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA LARA HERZOG et al., Petitioners, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN DIEGO

Read More »

Holland v. Silverscreen Healthcare, Inc.

Case Details and Video Transcript: Filed 4/16/24 Certified for Publication 5/10/24 (order attached)  IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA  SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT  DIVISION TWO JONIE A. HOLLAND et al., Plaintiffs

Read More »

Get Leads

Get qualified leads for your practice with Judigo Legal.