Plaintiff Al Shikha was working as a driver for Lyft when he picked up a passenger, Ricky Alvarez. After picking up Alvarez, Alvarez stabbed Al Shika multiple times in the arms and legs Alvarez had a history of criminal convictions, which included charges for drugs, theft, and possession of illegal weapons. Al Shikha alleged in his complaint that Lyft acted negligently by not conducting background checks on the passengers who use the app.

The Court of Appeal affirmed the decision of the trial court and held that Lyft does not owe a duty to their drivers by conducting background checks on passengers who decide to use the app. The Court of Appeal ruled that, while in some instances the defendant owes a duty of care to protect others from third parties, there is no instance here that warrants Lyft protecting their drivers from the unforeseeable harm that may be caused by passengers of the app. Furthermore, the Court of Appeal ruled that requiring Lyft to conduct background checks on their drivers would be highly burdensome to Lyft because there would be no way to monitor which criminal acts would come up on a passenger’s record. It would also be burdensome to Lyft because it could lead to discrimination among passengers between those who have been convicted of a crime and those who have not been convicted of a crime.

Furthermore, the Court of Appeal ruled that Al Shikha had not established that there was a heightened foreseeability because there was not a sufficient showing that there were prior incidents of violent crime. Al Shikha was able to show that there were about 4,100 incidents of sexual assaults over a 3-year period but was not able to determine whether these assaults were committed by drivers or passengers.