United States v. Joshua Woolridge

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that individuals who drove for Uber were predominantly local, intrastate transporters
• emphasizing that the inquiry focuses on the actual work performed by a particular class of workers
• relying on same provisions of arbitration agreement to conclude that plaintiffs “remain bound by that agreement notwithstanding their subsequent opt-out”
• evaluating the statistics and evidence made available “[t]hrough discovery” before concluding that “Uber drivers are not a class of workers engaged in interstate commerce”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).