Legal Opinion
Bruster v. Uber Technologies Inc.
District Court, N.D. Ohio
Decided May 23, 2016No. CASE NO. 15-CV-2653PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION & ORDER
JAMES S. GWIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff Ladon Bruster brings Ohio wage and labor law claims against Defendants Uber Technologies Inc. and its subsidiary, Rasier, LLC (collectively, “Uber”).1 Defendants move to dismiss this case and compel arbitration under the terms of the parties’ June 2014 Technology Services Agreement (the “June 2014 Agreement”).2 For the following reasons, this Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion to dismiss and compel arbitration.
I. Background
On July 30, 2014, Plaintiff Bruster activated his Uber account and began work as an Uber driver.3 In order…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Doctor's Associates, Inc. v. CasarottoSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Kai Peng v. Uber Technologies, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 2017
- Saizhang Guan v. Uber Technologies, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 2017
- Singh v. Uber Technologies Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2017
- Rimel v. Uber Technologies, Inc.District Court, M.D. Florida · 2017
- Smythe v. Uber Techs., Inc., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.