MDL Judge Appoints Lyft Sexual Assault Lawyers to Leadership Positions

Lyft sexual assault lawyers serving in MDL leadership roles will oversee common discovery in the litigation, argue key motions and potentially negotiate a global settlement of claims.

Three attorneys have been appointed to serve as co-lead counsel in the centralized litigation established for all federal Lyft sexual assault lawsuits, giving them authority to choose other lawyers to assist with common discovery and help coordinate efforts on behalf of all plaintiffs pursuing claims against the rideshare company.

About 30 Lyft sexual assault lawsuits have been filed in federal courts nationwide, each raising similar allegations that passengers were sexually harassed, assaulted, raped and sometimes kidnapped by the company’s drivers. Lyft sexual assault attorneys expect that number to continue to grow in the coming months.

Almost all of the plaintiffs in the litigation are women, many of whom say the company refused to make passenger safety a priority. Instead, they argue that Lyft failed to equip vehicles with surveillance cameras, provide sexual assault or harassment awareness training for drivers, and did not give passengers the option of selecting the gender of their driver.

Given common questions of fact and law being raised in claims filed throughout the federal court system, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) established a Lyft sexual assault lawsuits MDL (multidistrict litigation) last month, centralizing the claims in the Northern District of California under U.S. District Judge Rita F. Lin for coordinated discovery and pretrial proceedings.

The move was seen as a way to prevent the duplication of discovery efforts and keep different federal judges from making conflicting rulings, while also serving the convenience of the parties involved. Eventually, Judge Lin is likely to order attorneys to select a group of cases they find to be representative of the litigation as a whole to be prepared for early test trials.

These bellwether test cases give plaintiffs, defendants and the court a chance to see how jurors respond to evidence, testimony and arguments that are likely to be repeated throughout the litigation. The results of these trials can often form the foundation of settlement discussions.

Lyft Lawsuit Leadership Appointments

On March 26, Judge Lin issued a pretrial order (PDF) announcing the appointment of three attorneys to serve as co-lead counsel. She also empowered them to select a Plaintiffs Steering Committee and Liaison Counsel.

Judge Lin ordered the newly appointed leaders to submit their selections for those roles, along with a proposed order outlining their duties and responsibilities, to the Court by April 1, 2026.

These Lyft sexual assault lawsuit MDL leadership attorneys will handle key tasks during pretrial proceedings on behalf of all plaintiffs. This includes conducting discovery and depositions on common issues, arguing motions before the court, and potentially negotiating a settlement with Lyft that could resolve all claims.

Judge Lin also told parties to prepare a single proposed order that will include a process for filing cases directly with the MDL court, regardless of where the plaintiff is located, issues of plaintiffs’ pseudonymity, deadlines for filing master and short-form complaints, and other topics key to getting the litigation moving swiftly.

The next case management conference is scheduled for May 13, 2026.

Uber Sexual Assault Lawsuits

The claims against Lyft have been centralized in the same district as nearly 3,300 Uber driver sexual assault lawsuits, which have been placed under U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer. As part of the coordinated federal litigation, Judge Breyer has had parties prepare a group of cases for a series of bellwether trials.

In February, the first federal Uber sexual assault bellwether trial ended in an $8.5 million verdict for Jaylynn Dean, a former passenger who alleged she was raped by an Uber driver in November 2023. Jurors determined that while Uber was not liable for failing to provide additional safety features, it was responsible for the actions of the driver, who they saw as acting as an agent of the rideshare service at the time of the assault.

A motion filed on March 16 suggests that the company has reached some kind of Uber settlement agreement, but the details of that settlement, or how many cases it affects, have not been released to the public.

If there is no settlement agreement in the next couple weeks, the second federal bellwether trial is set to begin on April 13. Additionally, a California state trial is scheduled to start on April 4. After the trials conclude, if there is still no settlement, Judge Breyer may begin remanding cases back to their original districts for individual trial dates.

Sign up for more legal news that could affect you or your family.