TL;DR Summary
In a recent ruling, a New Jersey couple, John and Georgia McGinty, who suffered severe injuries in an Uber crash, were denied the opportunity to sue the company. The court decided that they had agreed to arbitration under Uber's terms of service when placing a separate Uber Eats order, which includes a clause preventing them from pursuing legal action in court for incidents related to Uber services.
The incident occurred in March 2022 when their Uber driver ran a red light, resulting in a T-bone collision. Georgia sustained multiple fractures and John faced serious injuries, including a fractured sternum. The couple attempted to challenge Uber in court, but the appellate court upheld the enforceability of Uber's arbitration agreement, citing that the terms are binding even if accepted via an account created by their minor daughter.
Uber contended that Georgia had accepted the terms on several occasions prior to the incident, while the McGintys expressed dismay at the ruling, arguing that it allows corporations to evade accountability through complicated user agreements. Their attorneys are considering appealing to the New Jersey Supreme Court .
This case adds to ongoing discussions regarding the implications of arbitration clauses in service agreements, with another high-profile case involving Disney also highlighting similar concerns .
Full Article:
LINK: https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/02/business/uber-eats-accident-lawsuit/index.html
In a recent ruling, a New Jersey couple, John and Georgia McGinty, who suffered severe injuries in an Uber crash, were denied the opportunity to sue the company. The court decided that they had agreed to arbitration under Uber's terms of service when placing a separate Uber Eats order, which includes a clause preventing them from pursuing legal action in court for incidents related to Uber services.
The incident occurred in March 2022 when their Uber driver ran a red light, resulting in a T-bone collision. Georgia sustained multiple fractures and John faced serious injuries, including a fractured sternum. The couple attempted to challenge Uber in court, but the appellate court upheld the enforceability of Uber's arbitration agreement, citing that the terms are binding even if accepted via an account created by their minor daughter.
Uber contended that Georgia had accepted the terms on several occasions prior to the incident, while the McGintys expressed dismay at the ruling, arguing that it allows corporations to evade accountability through complicated user agreements. Their attorneys are considering appealing to the New Jersey Supreme Court .
This case adds to ongoing discussions regarding the implications of arbitration clauses in service agreements, with another high-profile case involving Disney also highlighting similar concerns .
Full Article:
LINK: https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/02/business/uber-eats-accident-lawsuit/index.html
