Nevada Supreme Court Strikes Down Misleading Uber Initiative Thus Protecting Victims’ Access to Justice

Listen to this post:

Audio Player

The Nevada Supreme Court has delivered a victory for consumers and plaintiff lawyers by reversing and remanding a district court decision regarding Uber Technologies' controversial initiative to limit contingent attorney fees in civil cases. This ruling ensures that victims of negligence and wrongdoing in Nevada maintain equitable access to justice and fair legal representation.

What Was the Initiative?

Uber Technologies and its affiliates proposed an initiative to impose a 20% cap on contingency attorney fees in civil cases starting in 2027. The initiative claimed to protect consumers from excessive legal fees but raised concerns that it would severely limit victims’ ability to secure qualified legal representation in complex cases.

The Nevada Justice Association and Uber Sexual Assault Survivors for Legal Accountability challenged the initiative, asserting that its description of effect was vague and misleading.

Supreme Court Decision Highlights

The Nevada Supreme Court found the initiative’s description of effect insufficient and deceptive. Key reasons included:

  • Ambiguity in Statutory Caps: The description failed to clarify how the proposed 20% cap would interact with existing statutory caps on contingency fees for medical malpractice cases (35%) and cases involving private attorneys representing the state (25%).
  • Misleading Definition of Recovery: The initiative omitted critical details about how attorney fees would be calculated, making it unclear whether the cap applied to gross or net recovery. This omission created confusion about the initiative’s impact on victims and attorneys.
  • Lack of Clarity for Voters: The court emphasized that the initiative’s vague and deceptive description left voters unable to make informed decisions.
View Order

Why This Ruling Matters

This decision is a win for Nevada consumers and victims of injustice. By striking down the initiative due to its vagueness and deceptive language, the court safeguarded access to skilled legal counsel for those seeking compensation for injuries or losses.

A Victory for Nevadans

The Nevada Supreme Court’s decision reinforces that ballot initiatives must be clear, transparent, and not misleading. For consumers, this ruling ensures continued access to quality legal representation.

At Eglet Law, we are committed to fighting for the rights of injured victims and ensuring that justice remains accessible to all. This decision highlights the importance of protecting fairness and transparency in our legal processes.