Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
- Law360
- Law360 UK
- Law360 Pulse
- Law360 Employment Authority
- Law360 Tax Authority
- Law360 Insurance Authority
- Law360 Real Estate Authority
- Law360 Healthcare Authority
- Law360 Bankruptcy Authority
- Products
- Lexis®
- Law360 In-Depth
- Law360 Podcasts
- Rankings
- Leaderboard Analytics
- Regional Powerhouses
- Law360's MVPs
- Women in Law Report
- Law360 400
- Diversity Snapshot
- Practice Groups of the Year
- Rising Stars
- Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar
- Sections
- Adv. Search & Platform Tools
- About all sections
- Browse all sections
- Banking
- Bankruptcy
- Class Action
- Competition
- Employment
- Energy
- Expert Analysis
- Insurance
- Intellectual Property
- Product Liability
- Securities
- Beta Tools
- Track docs
- Track attorneys
- Track judges
Peter et al v. Doordash, Inc.
Case Number:
4:19-cv-06098
See also:
Court:
Nature of Suit:
Multi Party Litigation:
Class Action
Judge:
Firms
-
April 23, 2020
DoorDash Can Arbitrate Consumers' Tip Policy Suit
A California federal judge on Thursday ordered arbitration in a suit alleging DoorDash deceptively used customers' tips to subsidize drivers' pay, saying the app-based food delivery company's terms and conditions for all app users included a clear and valid arbitration provision.
-
December 16, 2019
Consumers Fight DoorDash's Bid To Arbitrate Tip Policy Suit
Consumers urged a California federal judge to keep alive their claims that DoorDash deceptively subsidized drivers' pay with customer tips, saying the app-based food delivery company's terms of service don't clearly notify users of an arbitration provision.
-
November 15, 2019
DoorDash Says Consumers Must Arbitrate Tip Policy Suit
DoorDash told a California federal judge Friday that consumers must individually arbitrate their proposed class claims it deceptively subsidized drivers' pay with customers' tips, saying there's no getting around the app-based food delivery company's arbitration agreement.