September 17, 2020

Michael Rattagan v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

Track this case

Case Number:

20-16796

Court:

Appellate - 9th Circuit

Nature of Suit:

4370 Other Fraud

Companies

Sectors & Industries:

View recent docket activity

Reflects complaints, answers, motions, orders and trial notes entered from Jan. 1, 2011.
Additional or older documents may be available in Pacer.

Coverage

  1. June 04, 2024

    Atty's Argentine Uber Debut Fight Lands At Calif. High Court

    Barring fraudulent concealment claims under the so-called economic loss doctrine would create "perverse incentives" for people to draw others into contracts and "have their way with them," the California Supreme Court was told Tuesday by counsel for an Argentinian attorney suing Uber on allegations it hid crucial information from him.

2 other articles on this case. View all »

Parties

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.


  • Direct access to case information and documents.
  • All significant new filings across U.S. federal district courts, updated hourly on business days.
  • Full-text searches on all patent complaints in federal courts.
  • No-fee downloads of the complaints and so much more!

TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS

View the parties now

Already a subscriber? Click here to login