A federal jury in Charlotte, North Carolina, has delivered a verdict in the second bellwether trial concerning allegations of sexual assault against Uber Technologies Inc. The jury found that an Uber driver sexually assaulted a passenger in 2019 but awarded the plaintiff only $5,000 in damages. This outcome contrasts sharply with a previous bellwether trial in Arizona, where a jury awarded $8.5 million to a plaintiff under similar circumstances. ([law360.com](https://www.law360.com/productliability/articles/2467462?utm_source=openai))
The North Carolina case is part of a broader multidistrict litigation (MDL) involving over 3,300 lawsuits consolidated in federal court, with plaintiffs alleging sexual misconduct by Uber drivers. These bellwether trials are intended to gauge jury responses and inform potential settlements in the remaining cases. ([wkzo.com](https://wkzo.com/2026/04/13/uber-faces-second-driver-sexual-assault-trial-following-8-5-million-verdict/?utm_source=openai))
In this trial, the plaintiff alleged that during a March 2019 ride in Raleigh, the Uber driver made inappropriate comments and touched her inner thigh. Uber did not dispute that the incident occurred but argued that it should not be held liable, contending that its drivers are independent contractors and that the company operates as a technology platform rather than a transportation provider. ([nationaltoday.com](https://nationaltoday.com/us/nc/raleigh/news/2026/04/16/uber-faces-second-sexual-assault-trial-after-8-5m-verdict/?utm_source=openai))
The minimal damages awarded in this case have sparked discussions about how juries assess harm in personal safety incidents. Billy Cooper, a New York-based trial attorney, commented, “A jury can acknowledge that an assault happened and still assign a number that feels disconnected from the reality of that experience. That’s not just a legal issue. It’s a societal one.” ([globenewswire.com](https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2026/04/20/3277521/0/en/Billy-Cooper-Law-Weighs-In-on-Split-Verdict-in-Uber-Sexual-Assault-Trial-and-What-It-Means-for-Rideshare-Accountability.html?utm_source=openai))
Uber’s classification of its drivers as independent contractors has been a central issue in these cases. The company maintains that it is not a common carrier and thus does not owe the heightened duty of care associated with that designation. However, plaintiffs argue that Uber functions as a common carrier, given its control over the transportation process and its marketing of rides as a service it offers. ([robertkinglawfirm.com](https://www.robertkinglawfirm.com/personal-injury/uber-sexual-assault-lawsuit/?utm_source=openai))
The contrasting outcomes of the bellwether trials highlight the variability in jury decisions and may influence future settlement discussions and trial strategies. Legal observers note that these cases could have significant implications for Uber’s liability and the broader rideshare industry’s approach to passenger safety.
As the MDL progresses, the legal community will closely monitor how courts and juries navigate the complex issues of liability, driver classification, and corporate responsibility in the context of rideshare services.