FOLLOW US

Uber Technologies Inc. has agreed to dismiss a federal lawsuit brought by the family of a rideshare driver who was killed by his passengers, ending a years-long legal fight over whether the company should have anticipated the risk to drivers accepting ride requests.

Court filings in Seattle show that Uber and the family of Cherno Ceesay jointly agreed to voluntarily dismiss the case after resolving the dispute through a settlement conference with a U.S. magistrate judge. The terms of the settlement were not disclosed.

U.S. District Judge Barbara J. Rothstein formally closed the case Wednesday, noting that under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a voluntary dismissal by the parties automatically terminates the litigation without further court action.

The lawsuit was filed in 2021 by Ceesay’s parents and sister, who alleged that Uber and its subsidiary Rasier LLC failed to take reasonable steps to protect drivers despite knowing they faced a risk of violent assaults by passengers. The family argued that Uber should have implemented safeguards such as enhanced rider screening, stricter identity verification, or limits on anonymous accounts.

Ceesay was killed during an attempted carjacking by two passengers who had requested a ride using what the family described as a fake account.

The trial court initially dismissed the case in September 2022, ruling that Uber did not owe Ceesay a legal duty of care and that the attack was not reasonably foreseeable based solely on the existence of a fraudulent rider profile.

That decision was reversed in 2024, when a divided panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the lawsuit. The majority held that rideshare companies have a duty to exercise reasonable care when matching drivers with passengers, rejecting Uber’s argument that drivers could simply decline risky rides.

The appellate court noted that Uber does not disclose which ride requests involve suspicious user profiles or anonymous payment methods, limiting a driver’s ability to assess potential danger.

Although the Washington Supreme Court declined to answer a certified question on Uber’s duty to drivers, the Ninth Circuit relied on a separate January 2024 state high court ruling in Barlow v. State of Washington. In that decision, the court emphasized that relationships marked by significant control and worker dependence can give rise to heightened duties of care.

Uber later asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the Ninth Circuit ruling, but the justices declined to take up the case in October.

According to court records, the parties participated in a settlement conference on Dec. 9 before U.S. Magistrate Judge Paula L. McCandlis, where they reached a resolution. A trial had been scheduled for April 6 before the settlement was finalized.

Attorneys for the parties did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The family is represented by Corrie J. Yackulic of the Corrie Yackulic Law Firm PLLC, Alexandra Caggiano of Weinstein Caggiano PLLC, and Brent Rosenthal of the Law Office of Brent M. Rosenthal PC.

Uber and Rasier are represented by Gregory F. Miller, Julie Hussey, Ulrike B. Connelly, and Jessica Everett-Garcia of Perkins Coie LLP.

The case is Drammeh et al. v. Uber Technologies Inc. et al., case number 2:21-cv-00202, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.