Uber Legislation in California: Impact on Personal Injury Claims | GoSuits

• What is the current state of Uber and rideshare law in California?
• How did AB 5 and Dynamex change worker classification, and why does that matter for injury cases?
• What did Proposition 22 do, and how does it affect personal injury claims?
• What insurance requirements do transportation network companies have in California, and how do these protections work for injured parties?
• How do arbitration clauses and class-action waivers affect injury claims against Uber or other TNCs?
• How do claims differ when you’re a passenger versus a third party on the road or a driver?
• What are common strategies plaintiffs and defendants use in rideshare accident litigation?
• How might upcoming or proposed rideshare legislation change the legal landscape in 2024 and beyond?
• What statistics are relevant to understanding rideshare risk and compensation?
• How do federal law and laws in Texas and Illinois relate to what happens in California rideshare accidents?
• What should you do immediately after a rideshare accident in California?
• How can a personal injury attorney help with an Uber or rideshare claim?
• How GoSuits can help you with a rideshare personal injury claim
• Resources and authoritative sources

What is the current state of Uber and rideshare law in California?

California’s legal landscape for rideshare companies blends administrative regulation, state legislation, and court rulings. Three legal threads matter most to personal injury claims:

• Worker classification law (the California Supreme Court’s Dynamex decision and the state’s AB 5 statute) changed how courts analyze whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor, which affects vicarious liability claims against platforms. See the Dynamex decision (California Supreme Court) and AB 5 text at the California Legislature site for full details: Dynamex (Stanford Law/Scotus-like repository) and AB 5 (leginfo.ca.gov).
• Ballot legislation — Proposition 22 (2020) created a new statutory framework specific to app-based drivers and exempted those companies from AB 5 classification for the driving services covered by the measure. The California Secretary of State ballot materials and measure text provide the official summary: Proposition 22 (California Secretary of State).
• Regulatory rules — the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) sets insurance and safety rules for Transportation Network Companies (TNCs). The CPUC’s TNC pages describe insurance requirements that affect how claims get paid: CPUC – Transportation Network Companies.

Because these three sources interact, the practical effect on any given personal injury claim depends on the facts (who was driving, whether the app was on, and which insurance period applies) and the applicable legal claims (negligence, vicarious liability, or statutory remedies).

How did AB 5 and Dynamex change worker classification, and why does that matter for injury cases?

Dynamex introduced an “ABC” test in California for distinguishing employees from independent contractors. Under that test a worker is an employee unless the hiring entity shows:

• A. the worker is free from control and direction,
• B. the worker performs work outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business, and
• C. the worker is customarily independently engaged in an independently established trade.

The California Legislature codified much of that framework in AB 5. Those rules are important in injury cases because if a driver is an employee, the employer (or a principal) can be vicariously liable for the driver’s negligence, which expands recovery options for injured third parties and passengers.

However, the rideshare companies argued that Prop 22 established a specific statutory regime that treats app-based drivers differently, which has created legal complexity about whether and when Dynamex/AB 5 apply to TNCs. For the official AB 5 statutory text see AB 5 (leginfo.ca.gov). For the Dynamex decision see the California court archive: Dynamex (Scocal).

What did Proposition 22 do, and how does it affect personal injury claims?

Proposition 22, approved by California voters in November 2020, created a ballot-law exception for app-based ride-hailing and delivery drivers. Key features relevant to injury claims include:

• Exemption from AB 5 for driving services covered by the measure — Prop 22 set a separate classification and benefits framework for app-based drivers; see official materials at the California Secretary of State: Proposition 22 (Secretary of State).
• Created certain minimum benefits and earnings guarantees for drivers when active on the app, and required the apps to provide some occupational accident insurance in defined circumstances. The measure’s text lays out those provisions.
• Left intact regulatory insurance obligations set by agencies such as the CPUC, so platform-maintained third-party liability and uninsured-motorist insurance remain a central source of recovery for injured parties when the platform’s coverage is triggered.

In practical terms, Prop 22 reduced the likelihood that TNC drivers would be classified as employees under AB 5 for the driving services covered by Prop 22, which affects claims that rely on employer liability. Still, the TNCs’ mandatory commercial insurance during certain periods means that injured passengers and third parties typically can look to the platform’s insurance in many cases. For the official ballot materials and text, see the Secretary of State: Proposition 22 (2020).

What insurance requirements do Transportation Network Companies have in California, and how do these protections work for injured parties?

The California Public Utilities Commission regulates TNCs and sets minimum insurance rules that apply during different “periods” of TNC app use. The CPUC’s consumer and TNC pages explain the basic framework:

• Period when the driver is logged out of the app: the driver’s personal auto insurance typically applies; the TNC’s commercial policy is generally not triggered.
• Period when the driver is logged into the app but has not accepted a trip: many TNCs maintain contingent liability insurance that may provide minimum coverage (commonly cited levels include $50,000 per person/$100,000 per accident for bodily injury and $30,000 property damage in past CPUC orders), though availability and application depend on the policy terms and the precise facts. See CPUC overview: CPUC – Transportation Network Companies.
• Period when the driver has accepted a trip and passenger(s) are aboard: TNC commercial liability insurance typically provides higher coverage limits, often up to $1,500,000 for third-party liability while a vehicle is engaged in a trip.

Those insurance rules mean injured passengers and third parties often have at least one insurance policy to pursue—either the driver’s personal policy (if the platform coverage does not apply) or the TNC’s commercial policies. The CPUC page is the regulatory source for the applicable insurance framework: CPUC – Transportation Network Companies.

REQUEST NOW

How do arbitration clauses and class-action waivers affect injury claims against Uber or other TNCs?

Arbitration clauses in user or driver agreements can channel disputes into private arbitration and sometimes include class-action waivers. Key legal points to know:

• Federal law favors enforcement of arbitration agreements under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). For the statutory language and background, see 9 U.S.C. § 2: FAA (Cornell LII).
• U.S. Supreme Court precedent has upheld the enforceability of arbitration clauses and class waivers in many contexts, including consumer agreements, subject to certain defenses like unconscionability; see AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion (2011).
• Arbitration does not eliminate insurance-based recoveries. If a TNC’s policy covers a claim, the injured party may still pursue policy remedies even when contractual arbitration clauses affect claims against the platform or the driver directly. Whether arbitration clauses can block a claimant from suing for policy limits or reach a corporate insurer depends on the policy wording and jurisdictional law.

Because arbitration clauses and class waivers vary across agreements and courts may treat them differently, these clauses are a central litigation and strategy issue for both plaintiffs and defendants in rideshare injury cases.

How do claims differ when you’re a passenger versus a third party on the road or a driver?

Different roles at the time of a collision change the claims process and options:

• Passenger: If you were a passenger in a rideshare vehicle during a trip, the TNC’s primary commercial liability policy for “period when engaged in a trip” will frequently be the first place to look. Passenger claims typically include the driver’s negligence claim against the driver and the TNC’s insured liability.
• Third-party motorist or pedestrian: A third party hit by a rideshare vehicle may seek recovery from the driver’s personal policy (if personal insurance applies), the TNC’s contingent policy (if active), or the TNC’s primary policy during an active ride. Complex factual questions — such as whether the app was on and whether a driver had accepted a ride — determine which insurer responds.
• Other drivers or injured drivers: Drivers injured by a rideshare vehicle face the same questions about the insurance period and may also consider uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage or direct suit against the driver for negligence.

Because insurance triggers depend on the app-status and contractual relationships, the initial factual investigation is crucial.

What are common strategies plaintiffs and defendants use in rideshare accident litigation?

Both sides typically use a combination of factual investigation, insurance analysis, and procedural tools:

What strategies do plaintiffs usually pursue?

• Quick preservation of evidence and statements — capturing app records, GPS, trip logs, and witness information as soon as possible.
• Promptly identifying whether the app was on and the trip status because that determines which insurer’s policy and which limits apply.
• Asserting negligence and pursuing all available insurers (driver’s personal, TNC contingent or primary, UM/UIM where applicable).
• Challenging arbitration clauses where appropriate if those clauses conflict with statutory rights or are procedurally or substantively unconscionable in the jurisdiction.

What defenses do defendants commonly raise?

• Independent contractor status or Prop 22 protections to limit vicarious liability claims.
• Arbitration and forum-selection clauses to move disputes into private arbitration.
• Policy-limit defenses and factual denials of negligence, comparative fault arguments, or disputes over which insurer is primary.

How might upcoming or proposed rideshare legislation change the legal landscape in 2024 and beyond?

Legislative and regulatory attention remains high. Areas to watch include:

• State-level changes to worker classification and benefits that could shift vicarious liability exposure and how benefits interact with insurance.
• Rules about insurance minima and uninsured/underinsured motorist coverages that could expand or constrain protections for injured parties.
• Limits on class actions and arbitration rules — both through state statutes and court interpretations of the FAA and state contract law.

For up-to-date proposals, follow the California Legislature pages and agency rulemaking at CPUC and state Attorney General guidance. The official AB 5 bill text and Prop 22 materials are good starting points: AB 5 (leginfo.ca.gov), Prop 22 (Secretary of State), and CPUC – TNCs.

What statistics are relevant to understanding rideshare risk and compensation?

Reliable traffic and safety statistics provide context for the stakes in rideshare injury claims:

• National traffic fatality and crash data — the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) maintains the Fatality Analysis Reporting System and publishes national traffic fatality and crash trends: NHTSA FARS (fatality data).
• State traffic collision data — the California Highway Patrol hosts Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS), which provides crash data used in injury and fatality analysis: CHP – SWITRS.

Those resources show the scope of traffic injuries and fatalities that form the background for many rideshare claims. Specific rideshare-only national statistics are produced periodically by academic researchers and government offices; consult peer-reviewed studies and state traffic records when estimating local risk levels in Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, Sacramento, Oakland, the Bay Area, Southern California, or Northern California.

How do federal law and laws in Texas and Illinois relate to what happens in California rideshare accidents?

Although rideshare regulation is primarily state-based, several federal and out-of-state legal principles can affect claims and defenses:

• Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) governs enforcement of arbitration agreements and often applies across states. See 9 U.S.C. § 2 and the summary at Cornell’s LII: 9 U.S.C. § 2 (Cornell).
• Texas and Illinois statutory and case law govern rideshare cases in those states, including classification, insurance, and arbitration issues. When injured parties or defendants cross state lines or when multi-state litigation arises, differences among California, Texas, and Illinois law can affect strategy and remedies. Always consult the specific state rules.
• Federal civil procedure and choice-of-law rules — for multi-state disputes or federal diversity cases, federal rules on jurisdiction and choice of law may affect how and where claims proceed.

Comparing California to Texas or Illinois can be useful for litigators building strategy, but the starting point for most personal injury claims involving Uber in California will be California regulatory and statutory law plus the relevant insurance policies.

REQUEST NOW

What should you do immediately after a rideshare accident in California?

Actions taken in the first 24–72 hours meaningfully affect the strength of a claim. Important steps include:

• Get medical attention promptly and keep records of all treatment.
• Preserve evidence: take photos, gather witness names and contact information, and preserve the ride receipt and trip details from the app if available.
• Document the app status: notes or screenshots showing whether the driver was logged in, waiting for a request, en route to pick up, or with a passenger on board help identify which insurance applies.
• Report the collision to the police and obtain a copy of the report.
• Notify your insurer if applicable and preserve communications with the TNC or driver. Do not sign releases or agree to recorded statements without legal guidance.

Because legal rules on insurance triggers and arbitration can be technical, contacting a lawyer early helps protect recovery options and preserves key evidence.

How can a personal injury attorney help with an Uber or rideshare claim?

A qualified personal injury attorney can help by:

• Conducting immediate factual investigation — securing app logs, trip records, witness statements, surveillance, and vehicle data.
• Identifying insurers that may be responsible and evaluating policy coverage and limits.
• Advising on arbitration clauses and procedural options and whether a direct policy claim is possible.
• Handling settlement negotiation or litigation and, if necessary, taking the case to trial.

Because rideshare claims often involve multiple potential payors and contractual defenses, professional legal representation reduces procedural mistakes and improves chances of full recovery. Do not rely on this summary as definitive for your case facts; consult a lawyer about next steps.

How GoSuits can help you with a rideshare personal injury claim

GoSuits handles civil personal injury claims related to rideshare and TNC accidents with a client-focused, results-oriented approach. Below are the ways we assist and the practical services we provide:

• What availability and communication do we offer?

• Available 24/7 with immediate free consultation at any time. You can contact GoSuits any time of day and receive prompt responses from attorneys and staff who can triage your matter immediately.
• Multilingual customer service (including 24/7 Spanish and Farsi speakers). We recognize that clear communication matters. Our intake and support teams provide consistent updates and explain case steps in plain language.

• What are our fee policies and cost transparency?

• No win, No Attorney Fees. Our contingency fee approach means you do not pay attorney fees unless we secure a recovery. For details see: No Win, No Attorney Fees (GoSuits).
• No Hidden Administrative Fees. We strive for transparent billing and clear explanations of costs and potential expenses.

• How do our tools and case workflow help your claim?

• Proprietary personal injury software: GoSuits deploys internal technology designed to accelerate investigation, demand preparation, negotiation, and litigation workflows. This system helps us gather records, track communications, prepare discovery and demands, and file litigation faster than firms that do not use integrated tools.
• Efficiencies that improve outcomes: the software is tailored to the steps that matter in rideshare cases (preserving app evidence, insurance identification, medical lien management), allowing the attorneys more time to focus on strategy, negotiation, and trial preparation.

• What is our experience and track record?

• 30 years of combined experience.
• Litigated over 1,000 cases with published settlement and verdict results. See our prior results: GoSuits – Prior Cases.
• Complex injury litigation experience: We handle cases involving severe injuries—brain injury, spinal injury, heavy-truck collisions, and product-liability matters—and we retain state-qualified professionals to establish liability and damages where needed.
• Multi-state practice: We litigate severe injury and complex cases in Texas, California, and Illinois, adapting strategy to local rules and insurance environments.
• Awards and recognition:

• #1 settlements and verdicts across multiple U.S. counties according to TopVerdict.
• Top 100 settlement in Texas.
• Sean Chalaki – Top 40 Under 40 (National Trial Lawyers).
• Recognized by Best Lawyers (2023, 2024, 2025).
• Super Lawyers (since 2021).

• Community involvement

• Active in local communities: board memberships in trial lawyer organizations, participation in schools, chambers of commerce, and local non-profit foundations.
• Leadership roles: we serve on trial lawyer and consumer-protection groups to advocate for safer roads and consumer rights.

• How we add value to your case

• Focused, not high-volume: GoSuits emphasizes quality legal services rather than handling high case volumes. That approach means more individualized attention, strategic planning, and early preservation of key evidence.
• Immediate action: with offices staffed around the clock, we can begin preserving app logs, obtaining police reports, and coordinating medical documentation immediately after you contact us.
• Coordination with medical providers and lien management: we manage medical billing and liens to reduce the recovery burden on clients.

Nearest office locations and immediate help: GoSuits maintains offices in multiple states with attorneys and staff available 24/7 to start your claim. When you contact us you will speak with a live team member who will evaluate your situation and explain next steps in plain language.

Resources and authoritative sources

• California Secretary of State — Proposition 22 (2020) official materials: https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/qualified-ballot-measures/prop22-2020
• California Legislature — AB 5 text: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB5
• CPUC — Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) and insurance/regulation overview: https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/industries-and-topics/transportation/transportation-network-companies
• Federal Arbitration Act (statute): 9 U.S.C. § 2 (text and context) at Cornell LII: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/9/2
• Dynamex decision (California Supreme Court) — worker classification ABC test (archival copy): https://scocal.stanford.edu/opinion/dynamex-operations-west-inc-v-superior-court-34483
• NHTSA — national traffic fatality and crash data: https://www.nhtsa.gov/research-data/fatality-analysis-reporting-system
• California Highway Patrol — SWITRS crash data: https://www.chp.ca.gov/programs-services/services-information/switrs

If you have been injured in a rideshare accident in California (Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, Sacramento, Oakland, Bay Area, Southern California, or Northern California), the facts at the scene — app status, driver statements, witness contact, and medical records — will determine the path forward. A personal injury attorney can help preserve those facts and explain insurance options and procedural choices.