Lyft sexual assault lawsuit

The docket record

Full docket title: IN RE: Lyft, Inc. Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation. Programmatic record page: MDL 3171.

Where it stands

The federal Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) centralized Lyft passenger sexual assault lawsuits into MDL No. 3171, "IN RE: Lyft, Inc. Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation," before Judge Rita F. Lin in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, in a transfer order dated February 5, 2026. The MDL's master docket is 3:26-md-3171. As of the JPML's September 1, 2026 pending-actions report, 106 actions are pending in the MDL, up from 72 a month earlier, a 47% month-over-month increase, reflecting a wave of individual cases being transferred in or filed directly. This is a separate, newer MDL from MDL No. 3084 (the Uber passenger sexual assault litigation before Judge Charles R. Breyer, also in the Northern District of California): Lyft and Uber are different corporate defendants, so the JPML created a distinct proceeding for Lyft cases rather than folding them into the Uber MDL. The litigation is still in its early stages; this page will be updated as case management orders, a master complaint, and any bellwether trial schedule are issued.

Sources: MDL Statistics Report - Distribution of Pending MDL Docke… · MDL Statistics Report - Docket Summary Listing (Transferr… · JPML Pending MDLs (report index page) · Lyft Sexual Assault Lawsuit MDL; full list at the end of this page.

What the lawsuits are about

Lyft is a rideshare company that matches passengers with drivers through its mobile app. These lawsuits allege that Lyft's driver background-check process, in-app safety tools, and internal handling of prior assault and harassment reports were inadequate, and that as a result some drivers who were matched with passengers went on to sexually assault them during or immediately after a trip booked through the app. Plaintiffs bring claims that include negligence, negligent hiring and supervision, common-carrier liability, failure to warn, and in some cases product-liability theories tied to app design. Plaintiffs' filings point to Lyft's own driver-screening practices and lobbying against stricter state background-check rules as evidence the company knew of assault risk. Lyft disputes that it is liable for the criminal acts of independent-contractor drivers.

Lyft sexual assault lawsuits were filed individually in federal courts around the country, including a case (Tabatha Means v. Lyft, Inc.) filed in the Northern District of California in January 2024. As those individual filings grew, plaintiffs' attorneys asked the JPML to centralize the federal cases for coordinated pretrial handling, citing shared questions about Lyft's knowledge of assault risk, its driver vetting and training, and its response to complaints, similar to the earlier Uber MDL. The JPML heard oral argument on the centralization motion at its January 29, 2026 hearing session and, on February 5, 2026, issued a transfer order creating MDL No. 3171 and assigning it to Judge Rita F. Lin in the Northern District of California, the district where Lyft is headquartered. At creation, the MDL consolidated at least 17 actions that had been filed across roughly 10 federal districts.

As of September 2026, the litigation is still in its early pretrial stages. The JPML's monthly pending-actions report first listed the MDL in March 2026, shortly after the February 5 transfer order, and the docket has grown quickly since: 106 actions were pending as of the September 1, 2026 report, up 47% from the prior month. This page has not identified a published master complaint, case management order, or bellwether trial schedule for MDL 3171 as of this writing; those will be added once issued. No settlement fund or claims process exists for this litigation.

Injuries named in the filings

• Sexual assault or rape by a Lyft driver during a trip booked through the Lyft app
• Sexual assault or rape by a Lyft driver immediately before or after a booked trip
• Sexual battery, unwanted sexual contact, or sexual harassment by a Lyft driver during a trip
• Physical, psychological, and emotional injury resulting from an assault by a driver matched through the app

Principal defendants: Lyft, Inc..

Sources: MDL Statistics Report - Distribution of Pending MDL Docke… · MDL Statistics Report - Docket Summary Listing (Transferr… · JPML Pending MDLs (report index page) · Lyft Sexual Assault Lawsuit MDL; full list at the end of this page.

Who the filings say qualifies

MDL 3171 is newly formed and, as of this writing, this page has not located a published Plaintiff Fact Sheet order or master complaint for it. The criteria below are drawn from the JPML's transfer order and the allegations common to the individual lawsuits that were centralized, as summarized by plaintiff-side litigation trackers; they should be treated as a general description, not a court-adopted eligibility standard, until a fact sheet order or master complaint is confirmed.

• The claimant was a passenger who booked a ride through the Lyft app and was paired with a driver through that app
• The claimant alleges they were sexually assaulted, raped, or subjected to unwanted sexual contact or harassment by that driver, before, during, or after the trip
• The incident occurred in the United States
• The claimant is pursuing (or is eligible to pursue) a civil claim against Lyft, Inc., not solely against the individual driver
• Claims are subject to each state's own statute of limitations for sexual assault and related civil claims, which varies by state and by the claimant's age at the time of the incident

Source: Lyft Sexual Assault MDL summary (as summarized by plaintiff-side litigation tracker AboutLawsuits.com); no court-issued fact sheet order located as of this writing.

These are the criteria in the public record, not a promise about any individual case. A law firm evaluates each case on its own facts, and limitations periods vary by state.

Key dates

1. January 10, 2024An early individual case, Tabatha Means v. Lyft, Inc., is filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging negligent hiring, retention and supervision, common-carrier negligence, failure to warn, and strict product liability. source
2. October 6, 2025JPML docket records reflect the opening of the centralization proceeding for Lyft passenger sexual assault lawsuits. source
3. January 29, 2026The JPML hears oral argument on the motion to centralize Lyft passenger sexual assault lawsuits at its January 2026 hearing session. source
4. February 5, 2026JPML issues a transfer order creating MDL No. 3171, "IN RE: Lyft, Inc. Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation," centralizing at least 17 actions from about 10 federal districts before Judge Rita F. Lin in the Northern District of California (master docket 3:26-md-3171). source
5. March 1, 2026MDL 3171 first appears on the JPML's monthly pending-actions report following its February 2026 creation. source
6. September 1, 2026JPML's monthly pending-actions report lists 106 actions pending in MDL 3171, up 34 (about 47%) from the prior month's report, and 115 total actions historically. source

Questions people ask

Sources: MDL Statistics Report - Distribution of Pending MDL Docke… · MDL Statistics Report - Docket Summary Listing (Transferr… · JPML Pending MDLs (report index page) · Lyft Sexual Assault Lawsuit MDL; full list at the end of this page.

Track this docket

We re-read the JPML report on the first business day of each month. Get an email when this record changes: case count, status, or a settlement development.

Sources

1. U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, “Pending MDL Dockets by Actions Pending,” monthly reports March 2, 2026 to September 1, 2026. Transferee court: Northern District of California, Rita F. Lin.
2. MDL Statistics Report - Distribution of Pending MDL Dockets by Actions Pending, September 1, 2026, U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. Accessed September 3, 2026.
3. MDL Statistics Report - Docket Summary Listing (Transferred, Active Litigations), September 1, 2026, U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. Accessed September 3, 2026.
4. JPML Pending MDLs (report index page), U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. Accessed September 3, 2026.
5. Lyft Sexual Assault Lawsuit MDL, AboutLawsuits.com (Miller & Zois; plaintiff-side litigation tracker, summarizing court filings). Accessed September 3, 2026.
6. MDL No. 3084 Transfer Order (Uber Technologies, Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation), U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. Accessed September 3, 2026.

Settlement Record is not a law firm and does not give legal advice. We may be compensated if you request a case review and are referred to a law firm or intake partner. Settlement Record is not affiliated with any court, agency, defendant or law firm named on this page.