California Appellate Tracker

Goncharov v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

February 2, 2018

A suit alleging that Uber misappropriated passengers and income from licensed taxicab drivers are barred under Public Util. Code section 1759 because a finding of liability against Uber would require factual findings that could hinder or interfere with the Public Utility Commission’s ongoing rulemaking pertaining to third-party carriers.

A taxi cab driver’s suit against Uber for providing unlicensed transportation services that appropriated passengers and income from licensed taxicab drivers was properly dismissed under Pub. Util. Code 1759 as interfering with the PUC’s jurisdiction. The PUC has had an on-going regulatory investigation into how to best regulate Uber and other similar transportation network companies. The PUC issued Uber a TNC license for its UberX service and continues to investigate whether and how to regulate that service as well as Uber’s other services. This suit would interfere with the PUC’s on-going efforts in this area. Also, raising the same arguments in a demurrer to an amended complaint as had been raised in the demurrer to the original complaint does not violate Code of Civil Procedure 1008–so long as the demurrer to the amended complaint does not reargue points on which the earlier demurrer was overruled. When the original demurrer is sustained as to all claims, all of the arguments originally raised may be repeated in a demurrer to an amended complaint.

California Court of Appeal, First District, Division One (Margulies, J.); January 29, 2018; 2018 WL 580714.

Subscribe to California Appellate Tracker

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Appellate Tracker Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

I Agree

Effective, Experienced, Exceptional.

California Appellate Tracker

Goncharov v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

Categories

San Francisco

Severson & Werson

Orange County

Severson & Werson