Case: Lowell v. Lyft, Inc.

7:17-cv-06251 | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Filed Date: Aug. 17, 2017

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On August 17, 2017, an individual from White Plains, New York who uses a motorized scooter to travel filed this putative class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Represented by private counsel and the Westchester Independent Living Center, the plaintiff sued Lyft, Inc., alleging a failure to provide accessible service to people with mobility disabilities in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. § 12181), the New York State Human Rights…

On August 17, 2017, an individual from White Plains, New York who uses a motorized scooter to travel filed this putative class action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Represented by private counsel and the Westchester Independent Living Center, the plaintiff sued Lyft, Inc., alleging a failure to provide accessible service to people with mobility disabilities in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. § 12181), the New York State Human Rights Law (N.Y. Exec. Law § 290) (“NYSHRL”), and the New York City Human Rights Law (N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-101) (“NYCHRL”). The case was assigned to District Judge Nelson Stephen Román.

Under Title III of the ADA, a private entity primarily engaged in the business of transporting people may not discriminate from use of its services on the basis of disability. Additionally, under section 12184(b)(2)(A), covered entities must provide reasonable modifications to their services that would enable persons with disabilities to enjoy those services. In her initial complaint, the plaintiff alleged that Lyft was a public accommodation within the meaning of the ADA, that Lyft provided worse service to individuals with mobility disabilities than to individuals without disabilities, and that Lyft failed to make reasonable modifications that would have made the service equally reliable for the disabled and non-disabled alike. The plaintiffs also alleged that Lyft violated the NYSHRL and the NYCHRL under similar theories, along with a claim that Lyft’s policies resulted in a detrimental disparate impact on people with mobility disabilities in violation of a separate provision of the NYCHRL.

The plaintiff sought certification to represent a nationwide class of similarly situated persons protected by the ADA—including all residents and visitors of all cities and regions serviced by Lyft—as well as two subclasses of similarly situated individuals protected by the NYSHRL and NYCHRL respectively. The plaintiff sought declaratory relief defining Lyft as a public accommodation within the definitions of the above statutes and that Lyft’s policies violate said statutes. She also sought injunctive relief to force Lyft to remediate their service into compliance with the ADA and New York statutes, as well as compensatory damages and attorneys’ fees.

On December 6, 2017 the individual plaintiff amended her complaint to add the non-profit organization Westchester Disabled on the Move, Inc. (WDOMI) as a plaintiff. 

Lyft filed a motion to dismiss on January 24, 2018 (docketed on March 30, 2018) on the basis of a lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. Lyft argued that the plaintiffs did not have standing to bring the claim because they had not signed up for a Lyft account, and that Lyft’s terms of service included an arbitration agreement and a class action waiver, which, Lyft argued, should prevent the plaintiffs from recovering under the principles of direct benefits estoppel. Lyft also argued that the plaintiffs failed to allege a concrete and particularized injury and actual or imminent harm. Lyft also took issue with WDOMI’s associational and organizational standing. Furthermore, Lyft further argued that, if the court retained jurisdiction, the plaintiffs failed to state a claim because Lyft was a technology company rather than in the transportation business and the remedy sought—that Lyft be required to purchase or lease wheelchair accessible vehicles (WAVs)—was not required under the ADA or New York statutes. Finally, Lyft argued the class claims should be dismissed because membership in the classes was dependent on a “purely subjective criterion.”

On March 6, 2018, the plaintiffs filed their response to the motion to dismiss, arguing that individuals were not required to engage in “futile gestures” to allege concrete injury under the ADA. The plaintiffs also submitted declarations from individuals with disabilities who were associated with the lawsuit indicating their desire to use Lyft’s services and their perceptions of the shortcomings of Lyft’s services that prevented them from signing up.

On April 5, 2018, the National Council on Independent Living requested the court’s leave to file an amicus brief on behalf of the plaintiffs, which Judge Román granted on April 17.  The brief largely bolstered the plaintiffs’ argument that downloading the Lyft app would be a futile gesture and therefore not required to obtain standing under the ADA. The brief also argued that Lyft is in fact a transportation company under the definition of the ADA.

Judge Román entered his opinion and order concerning Lyft’s motion to dismiss on November 29, 2018, granting in part and denying in part. He denied the motion with respect to the individual plaintiff, agreeing that the ADA does not require parties to engage in futile gestures where they know they can’t use a service because of their disability. The individual plaintiff’s allegation that she had notice that Lyft’s service had accessibility issues was sufficient to survive the motion to dismiss. Judge Román further agreed that the individual’s injury was fairly traceable to Lyft and that the court would be able to redress the injury. Lowell v. Lyft, Inc., 352 F. Supp. 3d 248 (S.D.N.Y. 2018)

Judge Román granted Lyft’s motion to dismiss the NYCHRL and NYSHRL claims for lack of standing with respect to plaintiff WDOMI, agreeing with Lyft that WDOMI did not have associational standing because the amended complaint requested compensatory damages, which would require the participation of the organization’s members. Judge Román also held that WDOMI lacked organizational standing, disagreeing with WDOMI that it suffered a concrete injury due to Lyft’s policy because it was forced to divert resources to advocate for its members i.e., bring this lawsuit. The court held that litigation costs alone are not sufficient to allege a concrete injury, and dismissed the amended complaint with regard to WDOMI because it failed to allege separate harms. Lowell v. Lyft, Inc., 352 F. Supp. 3d 248 (S.D.N.Y. 2018)

Judge Román further denied Lyft’s motion with regard to enforcement of the arbitration clause. He held that direct benefits estoppel did not apply because the plaintiffs were not attempting to benefit from Lyft’s terms of service—indeed their entire claim was that they were unable to benefit from Lyft’s services due to discrimination. Lowell v. Lyft, Inc., 352 F. Supp. 3d 248 (S.D.N.Y. 2018)

Regarding Lyft’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, Judge Román granted the motion with respect to the plaintiffs’ NYCHRL claim but denied it with respect to their ADA and NYSHRL claims. Judge Román held that the NYCHRL claims could not advance because Lyft did in fact offer accessible services within the city, and longer wait times did not give rise to a violation of the statute. In denying the motion with regard to the ADA and NYCHRL claims, which are analyzed under the same standards, Judge Román disagreed with Lyft’s characterization that the plaintiffs’ amended complaint asked the court to order Lyft to provide WAV service. Instead, he held that the plaintiffs merely requested that the court enjoin Lyft from further violations of the ADA and NYCHRL, which was sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss. Lowell v. Lyft, Inc., 352 F. Supp. 3d 248 (S.D.N.Y. 2018)

Following the court’s ruling, Lyft filed its answer to the plaintiffs’ amended complaint on January 15, 2019, denying almost all allegations and raising 15 affirmative defenses in total, essentially disputing that Lyft was a transportation company as defined by the ADA and alleging that the modifications sought by the plaintiffs were unreasonable and so not required by the ADA. The case then proceeded to discovery.

On April 8, 2019, the plaintiffs withdrew their demand for a jury trial. On April 3, 2020, the case was reassigned to District Judge Phillip M. Halpern. 

On October 15, 2021, the plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration of the court’s ruling on Lyft’s 2018 motion to dismiss because, according to the plaintiffs, the Second Circuit had examined and explicitly overruled the court’s ruling regarding the individual plaintiff’s NYCHRL claim (but not the WDOMI claim). Lyft did not oppose the motion, and on November 1, 2021 the court reinstated the plaintiff’s claim under the NYCHRL due to the Second Circuit’s ruling.

On March 30, 2022, the Paralyzed Veterans of America, the United Spinal Association, and the National Council for Independent Living submitted requests to file amicus briefs in support of the plaintiffs’ claims, which the court granted the next day. The Association of Programs for Rural Independent Living, and the African-American Advocacy Center for Persons with Disabilities submitted amicus requests on April 6 and April 12 respectively, each granted the following day.

Between January 2019 and August 2022, the parties filed numerous motions to seal discovery containing Lyft’s proprietary information and motions to compel discovery. Notably, on May 10, 2022, Lyft moved for the court’s permission to file a Daubert motion to exclude expert testimony offered by the plaintiffs in conjunction with their motion to certify the class. One of Lyft’s main arguments against class certification was that the plaintiffs could not satisfy the commonality and typicality requirements because their proposed modifications wouldn’t provide equal benefits to the whole class. Lyft argued that the testimony of an expert would be required to prove these elements, and it sought to challenge the expert’s qualifications. 

Lyft’s motion was referred to Magistrate Judge Andrew E. Krause for report and recommendation, which he returned on July 5, 2022. Judge Krause denied Lyft’s motion, holding that it went to the merits of the plaintiffs’ underlying claim and was more appropriately raised at the motion in limine stage of the litigation. The plaintiffs did suggest modifications in their motion to certify the class, but Judge Krause pointed out that in certifying a class, the court is not ruling on whether a reasonable modification exists. Rather, the question is whether the alleged injury the class has in common could be resolved with a single injunction. 2022 WL 17585670.

While plaintiffs originally submitted their motion to certify the class on May 3, 2022, they formally moved to certify the class on August 26, 2022 after the court resolved several motions to seal. The plaintiff sought to certify the following classes:

  • All residents of or visitors to any and all regions serviced by Lyft aside from Lyft’s Access Regions who required WAVs for vehicular transportation, and who were denied equal access to Lyft’s transportation services under the ADA (the “Non-Access Region Class”);
  • All residents of or visitors to the Access Regions Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Portland, or San Francisco who required WAVs for vehicular transportation, and who were denied equal access to Lyft’s transportation services under the ADA (the “Access Regions Other Than NYC Class”);
  • All residents of or visitors to New York City who required WAVs for vehicular transportation, and who were denied equal access to Lyft’s transportation services under the ADA, the NYSHRL, and the NYCHRL (the “NYC Class”);
  • All residents of or visitors to any and all regions serviced by Lyft in New York State aside from New York City who required WAVs for vehicular transportation, and who were denied equal access to Lyft’s transportation services under the ADA and NYSHRL (the “New York State Other Than NYC Class”);
  • All residents of or visitors to Westchester County who required WAVs for vehicular transportation, and who were denied equal access to Lyft’s transportation services under the ADA and NYSHRL (the “Westchester Class”).

On August 29, 2022, Judge Halpern scheduled a bench trial for January 17, 2023 and set a September 2, 2022 deadline for the parties to file letters informing the court whether they intended to move for summary judgment in advance of trial. The parties filed a letter on September 2, 2022 jointly agreeing to forgo pre-trial summary judgment briefing, and the case proceeded into the pre-trial phase.

The court held a pretrial conference on November 8, 2022 and subsequently ordered the parties to submit a new proposed pretrial order and proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. In response, the parties submitted a letter on November 21, 2022,  in which they agreed that the plaintiffs would withdraw the fifth claim of their complaint, which was for declaratory relief. The parties also indicated that they were unable to agree on which issues to present for trial. Lyft subsequently filed a motion requesting leave to file separate proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, which the court summarily denied on December 2, 2022, directing the parties to continue working to agree on simplified filings.

On December 13, 2022, the court held another pretrial conference in which Judge Halpern adjourned the January 17, 2023 trial without rescheduling because the parties could not come to an agreement on a proposed joint pretrial order. The court gave the parties a new deadline of January 13, 2023 to file their proposed joint pretrial order and a January 20, 2023 deadline to file a brief outlining their disagreements over the burdens of proof for each claim. 

On December 22, 2022, Magistrate Judge Krause filed a recommendation that the plaintiffs’ motion to certify classes be granted in part and denied in part. Judge Krause recommended the court certify the plaintiffs’ proposed “Non-Access Region Class,” the “New York State Other Than NYC Class,” and the “Westchester Class” as defined above. He recommended that the court not certify the “NYC Class” and the “Access Regions Other Than NYC Class” on the grounds that the proposed class representatives for those groups lacked standing to pursue the claim. Specifically, those plaintiffs did not allege  sufficiently concrete facts to support the claim that they had actual knowledge that downloading the Lyft app to try to receive service would be a “futile gesture,” which is the doctrine that originally conferred standing to the named plaintiff. Excluded from these classes were people who had downloaded the Lyft app (because of arbitration agreements and class waivers), who had filed separate lawsuits over WAV access, or who attended Ohio State University or the University of Texas at Austin and did not leave campus (because Lyft contractually provides service on those campuses). 2022 WL 19406561.

To certify a class, plaintiffs must satisfy the prerequisites of Rule 23(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. They must show that “(1) the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable; (2) there are questions of law or fact common to the class; (3) the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class; and (4) the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.” If the Rule 23(a) prerequisites have been satisfied, then class certification under Rule 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is appropriate when “the party opposing the class has acted or refused to act on grounds that apply generally to the class, so that final injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory relief is appropriate respecting the class as a whole.”

 Judge Krause’ recommendation found that these elements were satisfied for the three remaining plaintiffs. Plaintiffs proved the numerosity requirement with statistics showing that 2.3 percent of the people living in the areas that would be covered by the class categories use wheelchairs and 36 percent of Americans have used rideshare services. Plaintiffs estimated that the Westchester Class alone would contain more than 6,000 members, which is well above the District’s numerosity threshold of 40 class members. Commonality and typicality were satisfied because the putative class’s alleged injury arose out of Lyft’s uniform policies of not offering WAV access on its app. Judge Krause indicated that Lyft’s challenge to these elements of class certification actually amounted to either challenges to plaintiffs’ standing or the merits of the underlying claim. Because Rule 23(a) was satisfied, Judge Krause further found that the injunctive relief sought by the plaintiffs could be provided to all members of each class, as required by Rule 23(b)(2). 2022 WL 19406561.

Lyft subsequently filed an objection to Judge Krause’s report, again arguing that the plaintiffs lacked standing because they didn’t identify when they intended to use the app, contravening the injury in fact prong of Article III standing. It also argued that the plaintiffs failed the numerosity and ascertainability requirements for class actions because they could not identify specific individuals who would benefit from the ruling. Several disabilities-rights organizations filed an amicus curiae brief in response to Lyft’s objection on February 23, 2023. The brief, filed by Paralyzed Veterans  of  America, the United Spinal Association, the National Council on Independent Living, and Association of Programs for Rural Independent Living, argued that plaintiffs only need to indicate they intend to use the service when possible in order to satisfy the injury prong of standing, and that Lyft’s argument regarding numerosity and ascertainability were irrelevant because the injunctive relief sought could equally apply to 700 people or 7,000 people.

On March 24, 2023, Judge Halpern issued an opinion that largely adopted Judge Krause’s recommendation, with the additional holding that WDOMI did not have standing to assert the NYSHRL claims, as Judge Román had ruled earlier in the case. The court rejected each of Lyft’s objections to Judge Krause’s recommendation, with substantial analysis of the Article III injury in fact requirement, holding that the named plaintiff’s testimony and declarations sufficiently established her intention to use Lyft’s service if and when the app allows WAV access in her region. 2023 WL 2622925.

After the March 24, 2023 class-certification, the parties continued to confer about their proposed joint pretrial order and prepared for trial. On October 2, 2023, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed counts III and IV of their complaint—the counts pertaining to the NYCHRL—because the court had declined to certify the class of New York City plaintiffs. The new proposed joint pretrial order deadline was set to November 13, 2023, with an evidentiary hearing scheduled for December 12, 2023.

As of November 1, 2023, the case was ongoing. 

Summary Authors

Terry Howard (11/13/2022)

Terry Howard (10/12/2023)

Terry Howard (11/1/2023)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6140248/parties/lowell-v-lyft-inc/


Judge(s)
Attorney for Plaintiff

Appel, Marie Noel (New York)

Attorney for Defendant

Acosta, Nefi D. (New York)

Agnolucci, Simona Alessandra (New York)

Ahearn, Christopher M. (New York)

Baskin, Stephen E. (New York)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other
Attorney for Defendant

Acosta, Nefi D. (New York)

Agnolucci, Simona Alessandra (New York)

Ahearn, Christopher M. (New York)

Baskin, Stephen E. (New York)

Batts, Harper S. (New York)

Blackburn, James S (New York)

Blavin, Jonathan Hugh (New York)

Brady, Julie Singer (New York)

Bryant, Jennifer Lynn (New York)

Buchanan, Mary Beth (New York)

Caldwell, Christopher G. (New York)

Christoff, Annie Tauer (New York)

Dacus, Deron R (New York)

David, Danny (New York)

Davis, Andrew (New York)

Day, John G. (New York)

Dryer, Alexander Barnes (New York)

Duvall, Carly (New York)

Ercole, Brian Michael (New York)

Fidler, Harry Kinsler (New York)

Finkel, Noah A (New York)

Gardner, Allen Franklin (New York)

Giang, Albert Quoc (New York)

Horan, Thomas M (New York)

Hulme, Nathaniel F. (New York)

Johnson, Cameron (New York)

Jonas, Marie (New York)

Jones, Daniel E. (New York)

Kemp-Gerstel, Andrew (New York)

Lathram, J. Brook (New York)

Lee, Jiyun (New York)

Liang, Jeffrey (New York)

Mam, Chelsey Lyn (New York)

Manning, Stephen V. (New York)

Marmolejo, Matthew H. (New York)

Maroney, Michael T. (New York)

McInerney, Patrick A. (New York)

Meny, Rachael Elizabeth (New York)

Nelson, Jonathan Edward (New York)

Parasharami, Archis A. (New York)

Petersen, Kyle Anne (New York)

Pierson, Megan A. (New York)

Punak, Rebekah Leigh (New York)

Quimby, Paul Alexander (New York)

Rapaport, Jay (New York)

Santana, Alex (New York)

Santeusanio, David J. (New York)

Schreck, Debra E. (New York)

Schreiner, Barrett L (New York)

Shaw, Robert M. (New York)

Shudofsky, Sara Lynn (New York)

Slaughter, R. James (New York)

Smeallie, James D. (New York)

Steele, Jonathan (New York)

Weissman, Noah M (New York)

Zadikany, Ruth (New York)

Zaimes, John P. (New York)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document
1

7:17-cv-06251

Class Action Complaint

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

Complaint
20

7:17-cv-06251

Amended Class Action Complaint

Dec. 6, 2017

Dec. 6, 2017

Complaint
49

7:17-cv-06251

Opinion and Order

Nov. 29, 2018

Nov. 29, 2018

Order/Opinion

352 F.Supp.3d 352

340

7:17-cv-06251

Report and Recommendations

Lowell v. Lyft

Dec. 22, 2022

Dec. 22, 2022

Order/Opinion

2022 WL 2022

365

7:17-cv-06251

Opinion and Order

March 24, 2023

March 24, 2023

Order/Opinion

2023 WL 2023

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6140248/lowell-v-lyft-inc/

Last updated March 8, 2024, 3 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT against Lyft, Inc.. (Filing Fee $ 400.00, Receipt Number 0208-14028672)Document filed by Harriet Lowell.(Frei-Pearson, Jeremiah) (Entered: 08/17/2017)

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

Clearinghouse

Notice to Attorney Regarding Deficient Civil Cover Sheet

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

PACER
2

FILING ERROR - DEFICIENT CIVIL COVER SHEET CIVIL COVER SHEET filed. (Frei-Pearson, Jeremiah) Modified on 8/18/2017 (sj). (Entered: 08/17/2017)

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

PACER

Case Opening Initial Assignment Notice

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

PACER
3

REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to Lyft, Inc., re: 1 Complaint. Document filed by Harriet Lowell. (Frei-Pearson, Jeremiah) (Entered: 08/17/2017)

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

PACER

Case Designation

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

PACER
4

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Chantal Khalil on behalf of Harriet Lowell. (Khalil, Chantal) (Entered: 08/17/2017)

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

RECAP

Case Designated ECF

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

PACER

***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING DEFICIENT CIVIL COVER SHEET. Notice to attorney Jeremiah Lee Frei-Pearson to RE-FILE Document No. 2 Civil Cover Sheet. The filing is deficient for the following reason(s): Signature Error. Re-file the document using the event type Civil Cover Sheet found under the event list Other Documents and attach the correct PDF. Use civil cover sheet issued by S.D.N.Y. dated April 2014. The S.D.N.Y. Civil Cover Sheet dated April 2014 is located athttp://nysd.uscourts.gov/file/forms/civil-cover-sheet. (sj)

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

PACER

CASE OPENING INITIAL ASSIGNMENT NOTICE: The above-entitled action is assigned to Judge Nelson Stephen Roman. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned District Judge, located at http://nysd.uscourts.gov/judges/District. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. Please download and review the ECF Rules and Instructions, located at http://nysd.uscourts.gov/ecf_filing.php. (sj)

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

PACER

Magistrate Judge Lisa M. Smith is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: http://nysd.uscourts.gov/forms.php. (sj)

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

PACER

Case Designated ECF. (sj)

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

PACER
6

ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED as to Lyft, Inc.. (sj) (Entered: 08/18/2017)

Aug. 17, 2017

Aug. 17, 2017

PACER
5

CIVIL COVER SHEET filed. (Frei-Pearson, Jeremiah) (Entered: 08/18/2017)

Aug. 18, 2017

Aug. 18, 2017

PACER
7

SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED Summons and Complaint served. Lyft, Inc. served on 8/24/2017, answer due 9/14/2017. Service was accepted by Sapphire McFarlin, Administrative Assistant. Document filed by Harriet Lowell. (Frei-Pearson, Jeremiah) (Entered: 08/25/2017)

Aug. 25, 2017

Aug. 25, 2017

PACER
8

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Sara Lynn Shudofsky on behalf of Lyft, Inc.. (Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 09/05/2017)

Sept. 5, 2017

Sept. 5, 2017

PACER
9

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Harry Kinsler Fidler on behalf of Lyft, Inc.. (Fidler, Harry) (Entered: 09/05/2017)

Sept. 5, 2017

Sept. 5, 2017

PACER
10

NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS by Sara Lynn Shudofsky on behalf of Lyft, Inc.. New Address: Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, 250 West 55th Street, New York, New York, USA 10019, 212-836-7922. (Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 09/06/2017)

Sept. 6, 2017

Sept. 6, 2017

PACER
11

NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS by Harry Kinsler Fidler on behalf of Lyft, Inc.. New Address: Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, 250 West 55th Street, New York, New York, USA 10019, 212-836-7381. (Fidler, Harry) (Entered: 09/06/2017)

Sept. 6, 2017

Sept. 6, 2017

RECAP
12

STIPULATION AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by the undersigned counsel for the parties, that defendant's time to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the complaint is extended from September 14, 2017 to October 25, 2017. SO ORDERED. (Lyft, Inc. answer due 10/25/2017.) (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 9/13/2017) (anc) (Entered: 09/13/2017)

Sept. 13, 2017

Sept. 13, 2017

PACER
13

LETTER addressed to Judge Nelson Stephen Roman from Sara L. Shudofsky dated 10/25/2017 re: Request for Pre-Motion Conference. Document filed by Lyft, Inc..(Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 10/25/2017)

Oct. 25, 2017

Oct. 25, 2017

RECAP
14

LETTER addressed to Judge Nelson Stephen Roman from Jeremiah Frei-Pearson dated October 30, 2017 re: Response to Defendant's Request for Pre-Motion Conference (Dkt. No. 13). Document filed by Harriet Lowell.(Frei-Pearson, Jeremiah) (Entered: 10/30/2017)

Oct. 30, 2017

Oct. 30, 2017

PACER
15

MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 13 Letter filed by Lyft, Inc. ENDORSEMENT: Pre-Motion Conference scheduled for Dec. 6, 2017 at 11:15 a.m. ( Pre-Motion Conference set for 12/6/2017 at 11:15 AM before Judge Nelson Stephen Roman.) (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 11/16/2017) (mro) (Entered: 11/17/2017)

Nov. 16, 2017

Nov. 16, 2017

PACER
16

ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Nelson Stephen Roman from Jeremiah Frei-Pearson dated 11/15/17 re: Plaintiff requests that the Court grant her leave to move this Court to appoint FBFG and Mr. Hellman as interim co-lead class counsel. ENDORSEMENT: This motion will be discussed at the Pre-Motion Conf. scheduled for Dec. 6, 2017 at 11:15 a.m. Opposing party to state position in writing (not to exceed 3 pages). ( Pre-Motion Conference set for 12/6/2017 at 11:15 AM before Judge Nelson Stephen Roman.) (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 11/16/2017) (mro) (Entered: 11/17/2017)

Nov. 16, 2017

Nov. 16, 2017

RECAP
17

LETTER addressed to Judge Nelson Stephen Roman from Sara L. Shudofsky dated November 21, 2017 re: Response to Plaintiffs' November 16, 2017 letter [DKT No.16]. Document filed by Lyft, Inc..(Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 11/21/2017)

Nov. 21, 2017

Nov. 21, 2017

PACER
18

MOTION for Michael T. Hellmann to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number 0208-14415368. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. Document filed by Harriet Lowell. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit, # 2 Exhibit 1-Certificates of Good Standing, # 3 Text of Proposed Order)(Frei-Pearson, Jeremiah) (Entered: 11/29/2017)

Nov. 29, 2017

Nov. 29, 2017

PACER

Notice Regarding Pro Hac Vice Motion

Nov. 29, 2017

Nov. 29, 2017

PACER

>>>NOTICE REGARDING PRO HAC VICE MOTION. Regarding Document No. 18 MOTION for Michael T. Hellmann to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number 0208-14415368. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff.. The document has been reviewed and there are no deficiencies. (bcu)

Nov. 29, 2017

Nov. 29, 2017

PACER
19

ORDER FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE: granting 18 Motion for Michael Hellmann to Appear Pro Hac Vice. SO ORDERED. Clerk of the Court requested to terminate the motion (doc. 18). (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 11/30/2017) (ap) (Entered: 11/30/2017)

Nov. 30, 2017

Nov. 30, 2017

PACER

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Nelson Stephen Roman: Pre-Motion Conference held on 12/6/2017. Plaintiffs and Defendants counsel present. Court Reporter is Darby Ginsberg. Plaintiff granted leave to file an amended complaint by today. Defendant granted leave to file motion to dismiss. Plaintiff granted leave to simultaneously file a motion to appoint interim lead counsel with following briefing schedule: moving papers shall be served January 24, 2018; oppositions shall be served March 2, 2018; and replies shall be served March 23, 2018. The parties are directed to file all motion documents on the reply date, March 23, 2018, and to provide 2 copies of all documents to chambers as the documents are served. The Court advised counsel that defendants motion to dismiss would be decided before plaintiffs motion to appoint. ( Amended Pleadings due by 12/6/2017., Motions due by 1/24/2018., Replies due by 3/23/2018., Responses due by 3/2/2018). (Court Reporter Darby Ginsberg) (gs)

Dec. 6, 2017

Dec. 6, 2017

PACER

Pre-Motion Conference

Dec. 6, 2017

Dec. 6, 2017

PACER
20

AMENDED COMPLAINT amending 1 Complaint against Lyft, Inc. with JURY DEMAND.Document filed by Harriet Lowell, Westchester Disabled On The Move, Inc.. Related document: 1 Complaint. (Attachments: # 1 Docket Reflecting Court's Permission to File)(Frei-Pearson, Jeremiah) (Entered: 12/06/2017)

1 Docket Reflecting Court's Permission to File

View on PACER

Dec. 6, 2017

Dec. 6, 2017

Clearinghouse
21

TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings re: Premotion conference held on 12/6/2017 before Judge Nelson Stephen Roman. Court Reporter/Transcriber: Darby Ginsberg, (914) 390-4102. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Redaction Request due 2/16/2018. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 2/26/2018. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 4/26/2018.(Ginsberg, Darby) (Entered: 01/26/2018)

Jan. 26, 2018

Jan. 26, 2018

PACER
22

NOTICE OF FILING OF OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT Notice is hereby given that an official transcript of a Pre-motion conference proceeding held on 12/6/2017 has been filed by the court reporter/transcriber in the above-captioned matter. The parties have seven (7) calendar days to file with the court a Notice of Intent to Request Redaction of this transcript. If no such Notice is filed, the transcript may be made remotely electronically available to the public without redaction after 90 calendar days...(Ginsberg, Darby) (Entered: 01/26/2018)

Jan. 26, 2018

Jan. 26, 2018

PACER
23

ENDORSED LETTER: addressed to Judge Nelson Stephen Roman from Jeremiah Frei-Pearson dated 2/28/2018 re: Plaintiffs respectfully request a one-week extension of time to respond to defendant's Motion to Dismiss, thereby extending the deadline from March 2, 2018 to march 9,2018. Plaintiffs seek this extension in light of a medical emergency. Plaintiffs also request a corresponding extension for Defendant's reply brief, extending that deadline from March 23, 2018 to March 30, 2018. ENDORSEMENT: The application is granted. All motion papers shall be filed on March 30, 2018. So Ordered. (Responses due by 3/9/2018, Replies due by 3/30/2018.) (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 2/28/2018) (js) (Entered: 03/01/2018)

Feb. 28, 2018

Feb. 28, 2018

PACER
24

FILING ERROR - DEFICIENT DOCKET ENTRY - MOTION for Kathryn Elizabeth Carroll to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number 0208-14822364. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. Document filed by Harriet Lowell, Westchester Disabled On The Move, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit, # 2 Text of Proposed Order, # 3 Exhibit Certificate of Good Standing)(Carroll, Kathryn) Modified on 3/16/2018 (jc). (Entered: 03/16/2018)

March 16, 2018

March 16, 2018

PACER

>>>NOTICE REGARDING DEFICIENT MOTION TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE. Notice to RE-FILE Document No. 24 MOTION for Kathryn Elizabeth Carroll to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number 0208-14822364. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff... The filing is deficient for the following reason(s): Attorney Affidavit was filed upside down. Re-file the motion as a Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice - attach the correct signed PDF - select the correct named filer/filers - attach valid Certificates of Good Standing issued within the past 30 days - attach Attorney Affidavit - attach Proposed Order. (jc)

March 16, 2018

March 16, 2018

PACER
25

MOTION for Kathryn Elizabeth Carroll to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. Document filed by Harriet Lowell, Westchester Disabled On The Move, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit, # 2 Text of Proposed Order, # 3 Exhibit Certificate of Good Standing)(Carroll, Kathryn) (Entered: 03/16/2018)

1 Affidavit

View on PACER

2 Text of Proposed Order

View on PACER

3 Exhibit Certificate of Good Standing

View on PACER

March 16, 2018

March 16, 2018

PACER

>>>NOTICE REGARDING PRO HAC VICE MOTION. Regarding Document No. 25 MOTION for Kathryn Elizabeth Carroll to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff.. The document has been reviewed and there are no deficiencies. (ma)

March 16, 2018

March 16, 2018

PACER
26

ORDER FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE granting 25 Motion for Kathryn Elizabeth Carroll to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Clerk of the Court requested to terminate the motion (doc. 25). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 3/16/2018) (rj) (Entered: 03/19/2018)

March 16, 2018

March 16, 2018

PACER
27

LETTER addressed to Judge Nelson Stephen Roman from Kathryn Carroll dated 3/19/2018 re: Due to an oversight, my pro hac vice application (ECF No. 25) incorrectly indicated that I represent Plaintiffs in this case. I do not represent Plaintiffs. Document filed by Harriet Lowell, Westchester Disabled On The Move, Inc.(rj) (Entered: 03/20/2018)

March 19, 2018

March 19, 2018

RECAP
28

ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Nelson Stephen Roman from Jeremiah Frei-Pearson dated 3/22/2018 re: Plaintiffs respectfully request that the filing date for all motion papers on Plaintiffs' Motion for Appointment of Interim Lead Counsel be extended by one week, from March 23, 2018 to March 30, 2018. ENDORSEMENT: The application is granted. (Motions due by 3/30/2018.) (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 3/23/2018) (anc) (Entered: 03/23/2018)

March 23, 2018

March 23, 2018

PACER
29

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Andrew Charles White on behalf of Harriet Lowell, Westchester Disabled On The Move, Inc.. (White, Andrew) (Entered: 03/27/2018)

March 27, 2018

March 27, 2018

PACER
30

ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Nelson Stephen Roman from Jeremiah Frei-Pearson dated 3/23/2018 re: Plaintiffs respectfully request withdrawn their motion for appointment of interim lead counsel without prejudice. ENDORSEMENT: Plaintiffs motion for appointment of interim lead counsel is deemed withdrawn without prejudice. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 3/28/2018) (rj) (Entered: 03/28/2018)

March 28, 2018

March 28, 2018

PACER
31

MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. Document filed by Lyft, Inc.. Responses due by 3/2/2018(Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 03/30/2018)

March 30, 2018

March 30, 2018

RECAP
32

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 31 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. . Document filed by Lyft, Inc.. (Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 03/30/2018)

March 30, 2018

March 30, 2018

RECAP
33

DECLARATION of Sara L. Shudofsky in Support re: 31 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint.. Document filed by Lyft, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 03/30/2018)

March 30, 2018

March 30, 2018

PACER
34

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Opposition re: 31 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. Document filed by Lyft, Inc.. (Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 03/30/2018)

March 30, 2018

March 30, 2018

PACER
35

DECLARATION of Ed Sperling in Opposition re: 31 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint.. Document filed by Lyft, Inc.. (Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 03/30/2018)

March 30, 2018

March 30, 2018

RECAP
36

DECLARATION of Harriet Lowell in Opposition re: 31 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint.. Document filed by Lyft, Inc.. (Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 03/30/2018)

March 30, 2018

March 30, 2018

RECAP
37

DECLARATION of Jesse Sahagun in Opposition re: 31 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint.. Document filed by Lyft, Inc.. (Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 03/30/2018)

March 30, 2018

March 30, 2018

PACER
38

DECLARATION of John Strothenke in Opposition re: 31 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint.. Document filed by Lyft, Inc.. (Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 03/30/2018)

March 30, 2018

March 30, 2018

PACER
39

DECLARATION of Melvyn R. Tanzman in Opposition re: 31 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint.. Document filed by Lyft, Inc.. (Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 03/30/2018)

March 30, 2018

March 30, 2018

PACER
40

REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 31 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. . Document filed by Lyft, Inc.. (Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 03/30/2018)

March 30, 2018

March 30, 2018

RECAP
41

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE. Document filed by Lyft, Inc.. (Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 03/30/2018)

March 30, 2018

March 30, 2018

RECAP
42

LETTER addressed to Judge Nelson Stephen Roman from Sara L. Shudofsky dated March 30, 2018 re: Request for Oral Argument. Document filed by Lyft, Inc..(Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 03/30/2018)

March 30, 2018

March 30, 2018

PACER
43

MEMO ENDORSEMENT: on re: 27 Letter, filed by Harriet Lowell, Westchester Disabled On The Move, Inc. ENDORSEMENT: The Court is in receipt of a letter dated March 19, 2018 from Kathryn Carroll, notifying the Court that she incorrectly indicated she represents Plaintiffs in this case on her pro hac vice application. (ECF No. 27) Carroll does not represent Plaintiffs. Rather, she is requesting leave to file an amicus brief as counsel for the National Council on Independent Living and the Center for Disability Rights, Inc. The Court grants her application. The Clerk of the Court is directed to correct the docket to reflect Kathyrn Carrol as the attorney for the above named amici. Once the docket is corrected, Kathyrn Carrol is directed to file the proposed amicus brief. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 4/5/2018) (ap) (Entered: 04/05/2018)

April 5, 2018

April 5, 2018

PACER
44

FILING ERROR - WRONG EVENT TYPE SELECTED FROM MENU - MOTION to File Amicus Brief . Document filed by Center for Disability Rights, Inc., National Council on Independent Living.(Carroll, Kathryn) Modified on 4/19/2018 (db). (Entered: 04/05/2018)

April 5, 2018

April 5, 2018

RECAP
45

NOTICE of Supplemental Authority re: 34 Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Motion. Document filed by Harriet Lowell, Westchester Disabled On The Move, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Robinson v. OnStar, LLC)(Frei-Pearson, Jeremiah) (Entered: 04/10/2018)

April 10, 2018

April 10, 2018

PACER
46

NOTICE of Supplemental Authority re: 34 Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Motion. Document filed by Harriet Lowell, Westchester Disabled On The Move, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Namisnak v. Uber Technologies, Inc.)(Frei-Pearson, Jeremiah) (Entered: 04/16/2018)

April 16, 2018

April 16, 2018

PACER
47

ORDER granting 44 Motion to File Amicus Brief. Counsel's request to file amicus brief is granted. The brief is deemed filed. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 44. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 4/17/2018) (ras) (Entered: 04/17/2018)

April 17, 2018

April 17, 2018

RECAP
48

LETTER addressed to Judge Nelson Stephen Roman from Sara L. Shudofsky dated April 17, 2018 re: Response to Plaintiffs Notices of Supplemental Authority [DKT Nos. 45, 46]. Document filed by Lyft, Inc..(Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 04/17/2018)

April 17, 2018

April 17, 2018

PACER
49

OPINION & ORDER re: 31 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. filed by Lyft, Inc.., For the foregoing reasons, Defendant's Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Defendant's motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' NYCHRL claim is GRANTED and Defendant's motion to dismiss Plaintiff WDOMI's NYSHRL claim is GRANTED. Defendant's motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' ADA claims and Plaintiff Lowell's NYSHRL claim is DENIED. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 31. Defendant shall file its answer on or before December 20, 2018. The parties are directed to appear before this Court for an initial pre-trial conference on January 4, 2019 at 10:00 AM. The parties are also directed to confer, complete, and submit to the Court the attached amended case management plan before the initial pre-trial conference. This constitutes the Court's Opinion and Order. SO ORDERED., Lyft, Inc. answer due 12/20/2018., Initial Conference set for 1/4/2019 at 10:00 AM before Judge Nelson Stephen Roman. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 11/29/2018) (rj) (Entered: 11/29/2018)

Nov. 29, 2018

Nov. 29, 2018

Clearinghouse
50

ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Judge Nelson Stephen Roman from Sara L. Shudofsky dated 12/11/2018 re: Request for extension of Lyft's deadline to answer the Amended Complaint from December 20, 2018 to January 15, 2019 and request the Court reschedule the initial conference now set for January 4, 2019 to a date after January 15. ENDORSEMENT: Defendant is granted an extension of time until January 15, 2019 to file an answer. The Initial Pretrial Conference is adjourned from January 4, 2019 until January 25, 2019 at 10:15 am. No further adjournments. SO ORDERED., Lyft, Inc. answer due 1/15/2019., Initial Conference set for 1/25/2019 at 10:15 AM before Judge Nelson Stephen Roman. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 12/13/2018) (rj) (Entered: 12/14/2018)

Dec. 13, 2018

Dec. 13, 2018

PACER
51

PROPOSED CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN. Document filed by Harriet Lowell, Westchester Disabled On The Move, Inc.. (Frei-Pearson, Jeremiah) (Entered: 01/15/2019)

Jan. 15, 2019

Jan. 15, 2019

PACER
52

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Debra E. Schreck on behalf of Lyft, Inc.. (Schreck, Debra) (Entered: 01/15/2019)

Jan. 15, 2019

Jan. 15, 2019

PACER
53

RULE 7.1 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. Identifying Other Affiliate Rakuten, Inc. for Lyft, Inc.. Document filed by Lyft, Inc..(Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 01/15/2019)

Jan. 15, 2019

Jan. 15, 2019

RECAP
54

ANSWER to 20 Amended Complaint,. Document filed by Lyft, Inc..(Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 01/15/2019)

Jan. 15, 2019

Jan. 15, 2019

RECAP
55

ORDER REFERRING CASE TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE. Order that case be referred to the Clerk of Court for assignment to a Magistrate Judge for General Pretrial (includes scheduling, discovery, non-dispositive pretrial motions, and settlement). Referred to Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 1/25/2019) (ne) (Entered: 01/25/2019)

Jan. 25, 2019

Jan. 25, 2019

PACER
56

CIVIL CASE DISCOVERY PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER: All parties do not consent to conducting all further proceedings before a Magistrate Judge, including motions and trial, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Motions due by 3/23/2020. Non Expert Deposition due by 9/27/2019. Expert Deposition due by 1/30/2020. Discovery due by 1/30/2020. Case Management Conference set for 5/8/2020 at 10:00 AM before Judge Nelson Stephen Roman. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 1/25/2019) (rj) (Entered: 01/25/2019)

Jan. 25, 2019

Jan. 25, 2019

PACER

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Nelson Stephen Roman: Initial Pretrial Conference held on 1/25/2019. Plaintiffs and Defendants counsel present. Case Management Plan signed. The Court issued an Order of Reference to U.S. Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith for general pretrial purposes. Discovery cutoff is January 30, 2020. The briefing schedule for Plaintiffs Motion for Class Certification is as follows: moving papers served by February 4, 2020; opposition papers served by March 4, 2020; and reply papers served by March 23, 2020. All motion papers shall be filed on the reply date, March 23, 2020, and the parties are directed to provide chambers with two courtesy copies of their respective motion papers as they are served on the adversary. Status conference scheduled for May 8, 2020 at 10:00 am. ( Discovery due by 1/30/2020., Motions due by 2/4/2020., Replies due by 3/23/2020., Responses due by 3/4/2020, Status Conference set for 5/8/2020 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 218, 300 Quarropas Street, White Plains, NY 10601 before Judge Nelson Stephen Roman.). (gs)

Jan. 25, 2019

Jan. 25, 2019

PACER
57

SCHEDULING NOTICE: The matter of Lowell v. Lyft, Inc., 17-cv-6251 (NSR)(LMS), has been scheduled for an in-person status conference before the Hon. Lisa Margaret Smith, United States Magistrate Judge, on Thursday, February 28, 2019, at 2:15 p.m., in Courtroom 520. Please note: counsel seeking to reschedule an appearance must have all parties on the line prior to contacting chambers. ( Status Conference set for 2/28/2019 at 02:15 PM in Courtroom 520, 300 Quarropas Street, White Plains, NY 10601 before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith on 1/28/2019) (mro) (Entered: 01/28/2019)

Jan. 28, 2019

Jan. 28, 2019

PACER
58

ORDER: In order to facilitate the progress of pre-trial discovery of this litigation in a just, speedy and inexpensive manner, to insure compliance with the case management plan, and to prevent the accumulation of unresolved discovery issues, the following procedures will be followed for the resolution of discovery disputes: The party objecting to disclosure, claiming an insufficient response to a discovery request, or asserting a privilege bears the burden of coming forward by bringing the dispute to the attention of the court as hereinafter set forth. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith on 1/28/2019) (mro) (Entered: 01/28/2019)

Jan. 28, 2019

Jan. 28, 2019

PACER

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith: Status Conference held on 2/28/2019. Jeremiah L. Frei-Pearson and Chantal Khalil appearing in person on behalf of Plaintiff. Sara L. Shudofsky and Harry K. Fidler appearing in person on behalf of Defendant. Plaintiff must identify any and all experts no later than 7/12/2019; Defendant must identify its experts by 8/9/2019. When identifying experts, the parties must submit all of the information required under Rule 26, except for the expert report. Adjourned to April 9, 2019, at 2:00 PM for an in-person status conference. (Status Conference set for 4/9/2019 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 520, 300 Quarropas Street, White Plains, NY 10601 before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith.) (Court Reporter Courtflow) (mde)

Feb. 28, 2019

Feb. 28, 2019

PACER
59

PROPOSED PROTECTIVE ORDER. Document filed by Lyft, Inc.. (Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 03/04/2019)

March 4, 2019

March 4, 2019

PACER
60

STIPULATED CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT AND PROTECTIVE ORDER WITH NEW CH24...regarding procedures to be followed that shall govern the handling of confidential material. Subject to Standing Order M-10-408, filed 10/5/2001, copy attached. So Ordered. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith on 3/5/19) (yv) (Entered: 03/05/2019)

March 5, 2019

March 5, 2019

PACER
61

LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Lisa M. Smith from Jeremiah Frei-Pearson dated March 26, 2019 re: Discovery Status. Document filed by Harriet Lowell, Westchester Disabled On The Move, Inc..(Frei-Pearson, Jeremiah) (Entered: 03/26/2019)

March 26, 2019

March 26, 2019

PACER
62

PROPOSED STIPULATION AND ORDER. Document filed by Lyft, Inc.. (Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 03/27/2019)

March 27, 2019

March 27, 2019

PACER
63

RULE 502(d) STIPULATION & ORDER: 1. The production of privileged or work-product protected documents, electronically stored information ("ESI") or other information, whether inadvertent or otherwise, is not a waiver of privilege or protection from discovery in this case or in any other federal or state proceeding. This Order shall be interpreted to provide the maximum protection allowed by Federal Rule of Evidence 502(d). 2. Nothing contained herein is intended to or shall serve to limit a party's right to conduct a review of documents, ESI or other information (including metadata) for relevance, responsiveness and/or segregation of privileged and/or protected information before production. SO ORDERED (Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith on 3/27/2019) (rj) (Entered: 03/28/2019)

March 27, 2019

March 27, 2019

RECAP
64

RE-SCHEDULING NOTICE: In Person Status Conference set for 4/18/2019 at 02:15 PM in Courtroom 520, 300 Quarropas Street, White Plains, NY 10601 before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith. Please Note: Counsel seeking to reschedule an appearance must have all parties on the line prior to contacting Chambers. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith on 4/3/2019) (rj) (Entered: 04/03/2019)

April 3, 2019

April 3, 2019

PACER
65

NOTICE of Plaintiffs' Withdrawal of Jury Demand. Document filed by Harriet Lowell, Westchester Disabled On The Move, Inc.. (Frei-Pearson, Jeremiah) (Entered: 04/08/2019)

April 8, 2019

April 8, 2019

RECAP

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith: Status Conference held on 4/18/2019. Jeremiah L. Frei-Pearson and Chantal Khalil appearing in person on behalf of Plaintiff. Sara L. Shudofsky and Harry K. Fidler appearing in person on behalf of Defendant. Adjourned to June 4, 2019, at 4:30 PM for an in-person status conference. (Status Conference set for 6/4/2019 at 04:30 PM in Courtroom 520, 300 Quarropas Street, White Plains, NY 10601 before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith.). (Court Reporter Courtflow) (mde)

April 18, 2019

April 18, 2019

PACER
66

PROPOSED PROTECTIVE ORDER. Document filed by Harriet Lowell, Westchester Disabled On The Move, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Amended Stipulated Protective Order) (Frei-Pearson, Jeremiah) (Entered: 05/23/2019)

May 23, 2019

May 23, 2019

PACER
67

AMENDED STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER...regarding procedures to be followed that shall govern the handling of confidential material... IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that any person subject to this Order - including without limitation the Parties to this action (including their respective corporate parents, successors, and assigns), their representatives, agents, experts and consultants, all third parties providing discovery in this action, and all other interested persons with actual or constructive notice of this Order- will adhere to the following terms:During the course of this action, the Parties and their attorneys are hereby authorized to receive, subpoena, and transmit "protected health information," as defined by 45 C.F.R. §§ 160.103 and 164.501, pertaining to current and future parties, third parties and non-parties to other parties, third parties and non-parties and their attorneys and representatives. "Protected health information" ("PHI") includes, but is not limited to, health information, including demographic information, relating to either (a) the past, present, or future physical or mental condition of an individual, (b) the provision of care to an individual, or (c) the payment for care provided to an individual, which identifies the individual or which reasonably could be expected to identify the individual as further set forth in this order. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith on 5/24/2019) (rj) (Entered: 05/24/2019)

May 24, 2019

May 24, 2019

RECAP

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith: Status Conference held on 6/4/2019. Jeremiah L. Frei-Pearson and Chantal Khalil appearing in person on behalf of Plaintiff. Sara L. Shudofsky and Harry K. Fidler appearing in person on behalf of Defendant. Adjourned to August 1, 2019, at 10:00 AM for a telephonic status conference. (Status Conference set for 8/1/2019 at 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith.). (Court Reporter Courtflow) (mde)

June 4, 2019

June 4, 2019

PACER
68

LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to Identify Plaintiffs' Experts addressed to Magistrate Judge Lisa M. Smith from Jeremiah Frei-Pearson dated July 12, 2019. Document filed by Harriet Lowell, Westchester Disabled On The Move, Inc..(Frei-Pearson, Jeremiah) (Entered: 07/12/2019)

July 12, 2019

July 12, 2019

PACER

Order on Motion for Extension of Time

July 12, 2019

July 12, 2019

PACER
69

ORDER granting 68 Letter Motion for Extension of Time (HEREBY ORDERED by Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith) (Text Only Order) (mde) (Entered: 07/12/2019)

July 12, 2019

July 12, 2019

PACER
70

JOINT LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Lisa M. Smith from Sara L. Shudofsky dated July 31, 2019 re: : Proposed Amended Civil Case Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order.. Document filed by Lyft, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 [PROPOSED] AMENDED CIVIL CASE DISCOVERY PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER)(Shudofsky, Sara) (Entered: 07/31/2019)

July 31, 2019

July 31, 2019

PACER
71

AMENDED CIVIL CASE DISCOVERY PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER: All parties do not consent to conducting all further proceedings before a Magistrate Judge, including motion and trial, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). Plaintiff Harriet Lowell's claim under the New York State Human Rights Law is to be tried to a jury; the claims of Plaintiff Harriet Lowell and Plaintiff WDOMI under the Americans with Disabilities Act are not to be tried to a jury. Joinder of additional parties may be accomplished only with leave of court. Amended pleadings may be filed only with leave of court. Motions due by 11/23/2020. Expert Deposition due by 9/30/2020. Discovery due by 9/30/2020. Non-expert depositions shall be completed by May 21, 2020. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith on 8/1/2019) (rj) (Entered: 08/01/2019)

Aug. 1, 2019

Aug. 1, 2019

PACER

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith: Status Conference held on 8/1/2019. Jeremiah L. Frei-Pearson and Andrew C. White appearing by telephone on behalf of Plaintiff. Sara L. Shudofsky, Harry K. Fidler, and Debra E. Schreck appearing by telephone on behalf of Defendant. Adjourned to September 12, 2019, at 10:00 AM for a telephonic status conference. (Status Conference set for 9/12/2019 at 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith.). (mde)

Aug. 1, 2019

Aug. 1, 2019

PACER
72

LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Lisa M. Smith from Jeremiah Frei-Pearson dated August 12, 2019 re: Waived Jury Demand. Document filed by Harriet Lowell, Westchester Disabled On The Move, Inc..(Frei-Pearson, Jeremiah) (Entered: 08/12/2019)

Aug. 12, 2019

Aug. 12, 2019

PACER

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith: Status Conference held on 9/12/2019. Jeremiah L. Frei-Pearson and Chantal Khalil appearing by telephone on behalf of Plaintiff. Sara L. Shudofsky, Harry K. Fidler, and Debra E. Schreck appearing by telephone on behalf of Defendant. Adjourned to November 14, 2019, at 10:00 AM for a telephonic status conference. (Status Conference set for 11/14/2019 at 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith.). (ESL)

Sept. 12, 2019

Sept. 12, 2019

PACER

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith: Status Conference held on 11/14/2019. Jeremiah L. Frei-Pearson and Chantal Khalil appearing by telephone on behalf of Plaintiffs. Sara L. Shudofsky and Harry K. Fidler appearing by telephone on behalf of Defendant. Adjourned to January 9, 2020, at 10:00 AM for a telephonic status conference. (Status Conference set for 1/9/2020 at 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith) (ESL)

Nov. 14, 2019

Nov. 14, 2019

PACER
73

RE-SCHEDULING NOTICE: The matter of Lowell v. Lyft, Inc.,17-cv-6251 (NSR) (LMS), has been re-scheduled from a telephonic status conference on Thursday, January 9, 2020, at 10:00 AM, before the Hon. Lisa Margaret Smith, United States Magistrate Judge, to a telephonic status conference on Thursday, January 9, 2020, at 2:30 PM. Plaintiff's counsel is to have defense counsel on the line when contacting Chambers. Please Note: Counsel seeking to reschedule an appearance must have all parties on the line prior to contacting Chambers. SO ORDERED. (Telephone Conference set for 1/9/2020 at 02:30 PM before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith on 1/6/2020) (rro) (Entered: 01/06/2020)

Jan. 6, 2020

Jan. 6, 2020

PACER

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith: Status Conference held on 1/9/2020. Jeremiah L. Frei-Pearson and Chantal Khalil appearing by telephone on behalf of Plaintiffs. Sara L. Shudofsky, Harry K. Fidler, and Debra E. Schreck appearing by telephone on behalf of Defendant. Adjourned to February 24, 2020, at 10:00 AM for a telephonic status conference. (Status Conference set for 2/24/2020 at 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith) (ESL)

Jan. 9, 2020

Jan. 9, 2020

PACER

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith: Status Conference held on 2/24/2020. Jeremiah L. Frei-Pearson appearing by telephone on behalf of Plaintiffs. Sara L. Shudofsky and Harry K. Fidler appearing by telephone on behalf of Defendant. Adjourned to March 31, 2020, at 4:30 PM for a telephonic status conference. (Status Conference set for 3/31/2020 at 04:30 PM before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith) (ESL)

Feb. 24, 2020

Feb. 24, 2020

PACER
74

JOINT LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Lisa M. Smith from Jeremiah Frei-Pearson dated March 16, 2020 re: Proposed Second Amended Civil Case Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order. Document filed by Harriet Lowell, Westchester Disabled On The Move, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Second Amended Civil Case Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order).(Frei-Pearson, Jeremiah) (Entered: 03/16/2020)

March 16, 2020

March 16, 2020

PACER
75

SECOND AMENDED CIVIL CASE DISCOVERY PLAN AND SCHEDULING ORDER on re: 74 Letter re: Proposed Second Amended Civil Case Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order., filed by Harriet Lowell, Westchester Disabled On The Move, Inc. All parties do not consent to conducting all further proceedings before a Magistrate Judge, including motions and trial, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). All of Plaintiffs' claims are to be tried to a jury. Joinder of additional parties may be accomplished only with leave of the court. Amended pleadings may be filed only with leave of the court., Motions due by 5/24/2021. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith on 3/17/2020) (rj) . Modified on 3/23/2020 (rj). (Main Document 75 replaced on 3/24/2020) (rj). (Entered: 03/17/2020)

March 17, 2020

March 17, 2020

PACER
76

RE-SCHEDULING NOTICE: The matter of Lowell v. Lyft, Inc., 17-cv-6251 (NSR) (LMS), has been re-scheduled from a telephonic status conference on Tuesday, March 31, 2020, at 4:30 PM before the Hon. Lisa Margaret Smith, United States Magistrate Judge, to a telephonic status conference on Thursday, April 30, 2020, at 10:30 AM. Plaintiff's counsel is to have defense counsel on the line when contacting Chambers. Please Note: Counsel seeking to reschedule an appearance must have all parties on the line prior to contacting Chambers. SO ORDERED. Telephone Conference set for 4/30/2020 at 10:30 AM before Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Margaret Smith on 3/19/2020) (kv) (Entered: 03/19/2020)

March 19, 2020

March 19, 2020

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory: New York

Case Type(s):

Disability Rights

Public Accommodations/Contracting

Key Dates

Filing Date: Aug. 17, 2017

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

One individual with a mobility disability requiring the use of a motorized wheelchair and one nonprofit disability resources organization, seeking to represent a class of similarly situated individuals.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Non-profit NON-religious organization

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

Lyft, Inc. (San Francisco, California), Private Entity/Person

Defendant Type(s):

Transportation

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12111 et seq.

State law

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: None Yet / None

Nature of Relief:

None yet

Source of Relief:

None yet

Issues

General/Misc.:

Access to public accommodations - privately owned

Disability and Disability Rights:

Mobility impairment

Discrimination Basis:

Disability (inc. reasonable accommodations)