Litigation
Sep. 20, 2014
VIDEO: Enforcement of choice-of-law provisions: Uber confusing
Divvying the litigants a dose of procedural whiplash, a court recently confessed it changed its mind regarding a legal matter it adjudicated just months prior in the same litigation against Uber. By Erica M. Sorosky
The Northern District of California recently cried mea culpa in its 22-page order granting a motion for judgment on the pleadings in O'Conner v. Uber Technologies Inc., CV13-3826 (N.D. Cal., filed Aug. 16, 2013). Divvying the litigants a dose of procedural whiplash, the court confessed it changed its mind regarding a legal matter it adjudicated just months prior in the same litigation. In this U-turn of events, the court reversed it...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In