Los Angeles Workplace Sexual Abuse Attorney

Victims may pursue claims for negligent hiring, negligent retention, negligent supervision, and negligent entrustment under California Civil Code §1714. Rideshare companies operating in Los Angeles County also face potential liability for violating CPUC background check mandates under California Public Utilities Code §5445.2, which requires screening all drivers for sexual offenses. Prior internal complaints against the same driver—obtainable through civil discovery—often provide critical evidence of negligent retention independent of the assault itself.

Under CCP §335.1, adult sexual assault victims generally have two years from the date of the incident to file a civil lawsuit. However, AB 2777, codified at CCP §340.16, created a revival window for previously time-barred adult claims involving institutional cover-up, with a deadline extended by SB 1 through December 31, 2026. After that date, the revival window closes permanently, so Long Beach victims of older rideshare assaults must act before the 2026 cutoff.

AB 2777, codified as CCP §340.16, allows adult sexual assault survivors to revive time-barred claims against entities—including Uber and Lyft—that knew or had reason to know of a driver’s misconduct and concealed or failed to prevent it. The revival window remains open through December 31, 2026, following the SB 1 extension signed in 2023. Victims filing under AB 2777 in Long Beach initiate their lawsuit in the Los Angeles Superior Court, Long Beach Branch, at 415 W. Ocean Blvd., Long Beach, CA 90802.

SB 1 extended California’s AB 2777 revival window under CCP §340.16 to December 31, 2026, giving adult sexual assault survivors additional time to sue entities like Uber and Lyft for cover-up or institutional concealment of driver misconduct. After this date, previously time-barred claims that qualify under AB 2777 can no longer be revived under this statute. Long Beach and Los Angeles County survivors must engage counsel immediately, as investigation, drafting, filing, and proper service of process on corporate defendants requires significant lead time before the deadline.

Liable parties may include the driver individually, Uber or Lyft as the platform company, and any fleet operator or corporate account holder who arranged or facilitated the ride. Under CCP §340.16, Uber or Lyft may bear independent institutional liability if they received prior complaints about the driver and failed to remove him from the platform. California Civil Code §1714 provides the general negligence framework under which all of these parties can be held accountable for foreseeable harm to passengers.

Yes—California courts recognize that the independent contractor classification does not insulate rideshare companies from negligent hiring, negligent retention, or negligent supervision liability when the company retained substantial control over driver onboarding and conduct monitoring. AB 2777 (CCP §340.16) also imposes direct institutional liability on entities that concealed or failed to investigate contractor misconduct, regardless of employment classification. Proposition 22 (2020) altered worker classification law in California but did not eliminate tort claims against platforms for their own independent negligent acts.

Key evidence includes in-app trip records—GPS route data, timestamps, and driver identity—obtainable from Uber or Lyft through an immediate evidence preservation letter sent by your attorney. A sexual assault forensic examination (SANE exam) conducted within 72 hours provides medical evidence admissible in both criminal and civil proceedings at Los Angeles County SANE-certified hospitals. A police report filed with the Long Beach Police Department also establishes an official record and may trigger a parallel criminal investigation by the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office.

California courts and the CPUC have applied common carrier principles to Transportation Network Companies, imposing a heightened duty to exercise the ‘utmost care and diligence’ for passenger safety—a stricter standard than ordinary negligence under California Civil Code §1714. This elevated duty means Uber or Lyft can be liable for a driver assault if they failed to implement reasonable safety systems, such as responding to prior complaints or re-screening existing drivers. In Long Beach rideshare assault cases litigated in the Los Angeles Superior Court, plaintiff attorneys routinely invoke the common carrier doctrine to lower the evidentiary threshold for establishing breach.

California law permits economic damages—including past and future medical bills, therapy costs, and lost wages—plus non-economic damages for pain and suffering, emotional distress, and loss of enjoyment of life, with no statutory cap on non-economic damages in personal injury cases. If Uber or Lyft engaged in corporate concealment actionable under AB 2777 (CCP §340.16), punitive damages under California Civil Code §3294 may also be available where the company’s conduct was malicious, oppressive, or fraudulent. Prior settlements in Lyft’s 2023 class action ($25 million) and ongoing Uber sexual assault litigation confirm that rideshare corporations face substantial financial exposure in these cases.

Rideshare sexual assault lawsuits arising from incidents in Long Beach are filed in the Los Angeles Superior Court, Long Beach Branch, located at 415 W. Ocean Blvd., Long Beach, CA 90802. Complex cases involving multiple plaintiffs or coordination with other Uber or Lyft sexual assault lawsuits may be transferred to the Stanley Mosk Courthouse in downtown Los Angeles or consolidated under a Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding (JCCP) under CCP §404. Victims filing under the AB 2777 revival window must ensure their complaint is filed and served on the corporate defendant before December 31, 2026.

Sexual assault plaintiffs in Los Angeles Superior Court may file their complaint using a pseudonym—typically Jane Doe or John Doe—by simultaneously filing a motion for leave to proceed anonymously, which California courts have regularly granted in sexual violence cases to protect survivor privacy. Settlement agreements routinely include confidentiality provisions, though AB 2777 claims against institutional defendants carry specific disclosure requirements designed to promote public accountability and deter future cover-up. An attorney can also file a motion to seal exhibits or records containing sensitive forensic or medical information.

California Public Utilities Code §5445.2 requires Transportation Network Companies to conduct criminal background checks—including national and county records and sex offender registry searches—before permitting drivers to operate on their platforms. Unlike taxi operators, TNCs are currently not required by California law to conduct fingerprint-based background checks through the Department of Justice, a statutory gap that has been the subject of ongoing litigation and Sacramento legislative proposals. In Long Beach rideshare assault cases, evidence that a driver had prior offenses a fingerprint check would have revealed is frequently used to establish negligent hiring under California Civil Code §1714.

Yes—a civil sexual assault lawsuit applies the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard (more likely than not), which is significantly lower than the criminal beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard, and a civil claim can succeed even without a criminal charge or conviction. Long Beach survivors can file independently in the Los Angeles Superior Court, using in-app trip data, SANE exam results, and witness testimony as civil evidence. If a criminal investigation by the Long Beach Police Department or the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office is pending, civil counsel can often obtain police reports and forensic evidence through subpoena during civil discovery.

AB 218 amended CCP §340.1 to extend the statute of limitations and create a lookback window for childhood sexual abuse survivors (victims under age 18 at the time of the abuse), but that revival window closed permanently on December 31, 2022. AB 2777 enacted CCP §340.16 as a separate revival window targeting adult sexual assault survivors whose claims involve institutional cover-up by entities such as Uber and Lyft; the AB 2777 window remains open through December 31, 2026. Long Beach rideshare survivors who were adults at the time of their assault should consult an attorney immediately to evaluate AB 2777 eligibility before the 2026 deadline expires.

Call 911 to report the assault to the Long Beach Police Department, preserving a law enforcement record and initiating the criminal investigation process, and request a sexual assault forensic examination (SANE exam) at a Los Angeles County SANE-certified hospital within 72 hours to collect physical evidence admissible in civil and criminal proceedings. Do not delete the Uber or Lyft app or cancel your account, as in-app GPS route data, timestamps, and driver identification are critical evidence that may be permanently lost. Contact a Long Beach rideshare sexual assault attorney immediately to send an evidence preservation letter to Uber or Lyft, because without written notice corporate defendants may delete trip records and internal complaint files within their standard data retention windows.