A New Jersey couple suffered life-changing injuries after crashing in an Uber and now they learned they can’t sue the company.
A judge told Georgia and John McGinty of Princeton, New Jersey, that they are subject to a misleading clause in Uber’s terms and conditions that states they cannot take a case to a jury in a court of law.
On March 31, 2022, the couple was traveling in a vehicle operated by Uber driver Jia Wen Zheng when Zheng ran a red light and crashed into a vehicle, according to court documents.
The McGintys suffered serious physical injuries. Georgia suffered cervical and lumbar spine fractures, rib fractures, a protruding hernia, and traumatic injuries to her abdominal wall and public floor.
He underwent multiple surgeries and was unable to work since the accident until April 1, 2023.
A judge told Georgia (left) and John (right) McGinty of Princeton, New Jersey, that they are subject to a misleading clause in Uber’s terms and conditions that states they cannot take a case to a jury in a court of justice.
On March 31, 2022, the couple was traveling in a vehicle operated by Uber driver Jia Wen Zheng when Zheng ran a red light and crashed into a vehicle, according to court documents.
John had a fractured sternum and severely fractured arm and wrist requiring open reduction and internal fixation with a bone graft alone to treat the arm fractures.
He now has decreased use and sensation in his left wrist.
In February 2023, the couple filed a lawsuit against the company, Zheng, and the driver they hit.
Uber filed a motion to compel arbitration, which is when they ask the court to enforce a contractual arbitration clause and demand that the parties resolve their differences through arbitration rather than litigation.
But the company would not compensate for those injuries because Georgia had agreed to the terms and conditions listed in the company’s Terms of Use that users must agree to before using the app.
In court papers, it said the McGintys had stated that they did not remember seeing a ‘click box’ on the date of January 8, 2022. They argued that they believed their daughter Julia, then 12 years old, had clicked on her while they were packing for an upcoming ski trip.
At 6:15 that day, Julia ordered food at a restaurant. The couple said they couldn’t remember if she had asked for it herself or if Georgia helped her, but they remembered their daughter holding the phone to check the location of the delivery people.
Uber argued that it was activated as its records show and that Georgia tipped the Uber driver when the food was delivered.
In February 2023, the couple filed a lawsuit against the company, Zheng, and the driver they hit.
In court papers, it said the McGintys had stated that they did not remember seeing a ‘click box’ on the date of January 8, 2022. They argued that they believed their daughter Julia (right), then 12 years old, had clicked on it while they were packing. for an upcoming ski trip
Originally, the New Jersey court denied Uber’s motion to compel arbitration, saying it was unenforceable because the agreement was unambiguous.
But Uber would appeal, delaying the lawsuit until September 20, when the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey ruled in favor of the company.
They wrote in a per curiam opinion appearing in court documents: “We hold that the arbitration provision contained in the agreement under review, which Georgia or her minor daughter agreed to while using her cell phone, is valid and enforceable.”
The couple told bbc: ‘How could I remotely think that my ability to protect my constitutional rights to a trial would be waived if I order food?’
On September 20, the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey ruled in favor of the company.
The couple told the BBC: “How could I remotely think that my ability to protect my constitutional rights to a trial would be waived if I ordered food?”
In another case of a company that used an arbitration clause, Disney claimed in a May 31 filing that a widower whose wife died after suffering a severe allergic reaction at a theme park restaurant could not sue the company because he previously had entered into an arbitration clause. Free one-month trial of their Disney+ streaming service.
Kanokporn Tangsuan, 42, suffered a fatal allergic reaction on Oct. 5 last year after she and her family dined at Raglan Road Irish Pub and Restaurant in Disney Springs, Walt Disney World’s open-air shopping center.
The family claimed their waiter assured them the food would be allergen-free.
Her husband Jeffrey Piccolo filed a wrongful death lawsuit in Florida, alleging that Walt Disney Parks and Resorts was negligent and failed to properly train its staff about food allergies.
But Disney attempted to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that it should instead be sent to arbitration because the terms and agreements of its streaming service contract include a “binding arbitration clause,” court records show.
