A proposed ballot initiative by Uber to cap attorney fees and limit medical damage recovery in California car crashes has ignited a multi-front battle with lawyers and doctors, potentially heading for a contentious vote in November. The ride-sharing company filed the measure last fall, aiming to address what it describes as excessive litigation costs stemming from vehicle accidents, even those not involving Uber drivers.
The initiative seeks to cap contingency fees charged by personal injury lawyers and place limits on the amount of medical expenses that can be claimed in lawsuits. Uber argues this will reduce costs and benefit both drivers and riders. However, the proposal has drawn swift and strong opposition from legal and medical communities.
In response, attorney groups have proposed three competing ballot initiatives. These measures would expand Uber’s liability for passenger injuries, increase its accountability for sexual misconduct involving riders or drivers, and prevent the state from enacting future laws that restrict individuals’ ability to hire legal counsel, according to reports from CalMatters and the Mercury News.
Doctors and medical providers have also mobilized against Uber’s initiative, forming a political action committee called Providers for Patient Care last October. They argue that limiting medical damage recovery will negatively impact patient care and shift costs onto healthcare systems.
Despite the opposition, some legal experts believe Uber’s initiative could resonate with California voters. Stanford University law professor Nora Engstrom, a litigation expert, suggested the measure has a “bumper sticker quality” that could prove appealing, even while acknowledging it could “backfire” on the company. Engstrom has researched the effects of contingency fees on competition and has publicly opposed the measure.
The conflict follows a recent instance where Uber secured a legislative victory in California, reducing its costs through a bill passed by the state legislature. This latest effort to shape policy through a ballot initiative underscores the company’s willingness to engage directly with voters on key issues affecting its business model.
The outcome of the November vote could have significant implications for anyone involved in a car crash in California, impacting legal fees, medical expense recovery, and the liability of ride-sharing companies. As of February 24, 2026, the initiatives are still under review and no official campaign funding totals have been released.
