April 30, 2026
Uber was recently hit with another unfavorable verdict in the second bellwether trial in multidistrict litigation over driver sex assaults, and another determination that the ride-hailing company can be liable for its drivers’ negligence does not bode well for the company, experts said.
Following a four-day trial and about three hours of deliberation, a North Carolina federal jury on April 20 found an Uber Technologies Inc. driver had committed battery against passenger Brianna Mensing, who accused him of grabbing her leg in 2019, and awarded her $5,000 in damages for emotional distress.
Earlier in the case, U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer, who is overseeing the MDL and presided over Mensing’s trial, had ruled that Uber is a “common carrier” under North Carolina law and therefore has a “non-delegable duty” to safely transport passengers.
The MDL, which encompasses more than 3,100 cases, alleges Uber knew since 2014 that drivers for its app preyed on and sexually assaulted passengers and that the company didn’t adopt safety measures such as cameras and enhanced background checks.
In the first bellwether trial in February, an Arizona federal jury determined that the driver was acting as the “apparent agent” of Uber, making the ride-hailing company liable for the assault, and awarded $8.5 million in compensatory damages.
A Win Is a Win
One plaintiffs attorney and former prosecutor praised the outcome of the North Carolina trial, telling Law360 that despite the modest damages award, it was a solid victory for the plaintiffs.
“It’s a superb outcome in terms of the finding of liability against Uber,” said Takisha Richardson of Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC, which is not handling any Uber MDL cases. “The biggest challenge in these cases is whether Uber is liable for the conduct of these drivers.”
Richardson, a former Special Victims Unit state prosecutor for Palm Beach, Florida, said Uber’s position continues to be that its drivers are individual contractors and therefore the company is not liable for their conduct.
“But the jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff, despite the numeric damages award, is very specific in holding Uber liable for the conduct of their drivers,” she said.
The case is important, Richardson said, because it represented the lower end of the spectrum of sexual assaults and showed the company can still be held accountable, even if the driver’s misconduct is to a lesser degree than a rape.
“We all understand what a rape is, and that’s a very simple concept for the broad public to understand,” she said. “But something of this level — the touching of the inner thigh — that, too is a violation of one’s body and there’s a consequence for that.”
Richardson said she “applauded” Mensing’s counsel for taking the case despite the potentially low monetary stakes.
“The status of a woman to have complete autonomy over her body and whether she wants to be touched is something to be valued,” she said. “There should be a sentence to pay for that.”
The Cohen Milstein attorney said she is interested in seeing the range of allegations in the other bellwether cases. The next bellwether trial is scheduled to take place in the Northern District of California in September, according to court records.
“I want to see how much it’s going to take in terms of getting Uber to come to the table and negotiate a meaningful settlement,” Richardson said.
Richardson said she thinks it’ll take about “half a dozen or so” unfavorable outcomes in the bellwether trials before Uber even thinks about settling.
“There have been two extremes in the losses for Uber,” she said. “I wonder if there will be some in-between cases that will give them a range of verdicts.”
Read Uber’s Latest Bellwether Loss Could Portend Trouble For Co..