Legal Opinion
City of S.F. v. Uber Techs., Inc.
California Court of Appeal, 5th District
Decided May 17, 2019No. A153205PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPetrou, J.
*70Appellants Uber Technologies, Inc., Raiser-CA, LLC, and Rasier, LLC (collectively, Uber) challenge an order directing them to comply with administrative subpoenas issued by the City Attorney of San Francisco (the City Attorney) for reports and data submitted to the California Public *277Utility Commission (CPUC).1
We find that it was within the City Attorney's investigative powers to issue the administrative subpoenas. We further find that section 1759 of the Public Utilities Code2 did not deprive the trial court of jurisdiction and that the primary jurisdiction doctrine did not apply to postpone…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- United States v. Morton Salt Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Rojo v. KligerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
- Farmers Insurance Exchange v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
- San Diego Gas & Electric Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
- Doe v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- AquAlliance v. Vina Groundwater Sustainability AgencyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2026
- Brown v. Dept. of Motor VehiclesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2026
- Guzman v. Super. Ct.California Court of Appeal · 2026
- State Water Resources Control Bd. v. Baldwin & Sons, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2020
- Uber Technologies Pricing CasesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2020