California lawyers have pushed back against Uber’s ballot initiative to cap personal injury attorney fees for car crash cases. Uber claims that if California voters pass the ballot measure, victims will receive a larger percentage of settlement money. However, lawyers fighting the initiative argue that the change would financially undermine their specialty, making it more challenging for plaintiffs to find an attorney. 

Since California personal injury lawyers handling car crashes work on a contingency basis, fewer attorneys might be motivated to take on riskier cases, potentially leaving rideshare giants like Uber with lower accountability for crashes. As Uber gathers signatures for the November ballot initiative, dozens of attorneys have raised over $46 million to fight Uber’s initiative, according to the Los Angeles Times. 

If approved, the California Constitution would be amended to require car accident victims to receive at least 75% of the total damages recovered. Currently, there is no constitutional minimum, as victims negotiate on a personal basis with lawyers. The American Bar Association reports that personal injury attorneys typically take 33% to 40% of a client’s payout today.

What California Car Crash Settlements Really Look Like 

Personal injury firm Cohen & Marzban in Los Angeles states that in 2026, minor injuries, such as sprains, mild whiplash, and soft-tissue damage requiring limited treatment, result in settlements averaging $5,000 to $25,000. Moderate injuries, which can include broken bones, concussions, and extensive tissue damage needing surgery or months of recovery, can generate settlements ranging from $30,000 to $85,000. Severe or catastrophic injuries like spinal cord/traumatic brain injuries, severe burns, and permanent disabilities can result in settlements of $250,000 to over $3 million. 

The Signature Threshold Uber Must Clear

While a California initiative statute requires 546,651 signatures to appear on November’s ballot, an initiative constitutional amendment, such as the one Uber’s pushing for, needs 874,641 signatures. Uber has until June 8, 2026 to submit the signatures. Despite some initiatives showing a percentage of signatures reached, California’s Secretary of State website doesn’t yet display Uber’s progress. 

Critics argue a one-sided legal advantage for Uber

The initiative’s filing states that it wouldn’t restrict fee arrangements for defendants’ attorneys, so lawyers representing companies like Uber don’t face fee limits, while capping victim lawyer payments. This dynamic could result in plaintiffs receiving weaker representation and smaller settlements. 

Nicholas Rowley, a lawyer involved in the Consumer Attorneys of California effort to protect consumer legal rights, said: “Uber knows darn well what they’ve done. This law is designed to wipe out ordinary working people’s ability to get representation,” the Los Angeles Times reports.

How Uber’s Proposal Could Limit Access to Medical Care

For certain medical expenses such as future care, Uber’s initiative would increase victims’ burden of proof while limiting the amounts they may recover. Lien-based medical care, common among car crash victims, allows those harmed to receive medical care at no upfront cost, as medical providers agree to a lien on future settlements from auto insurers. 

If Uber limits settlements from one of its at-fault drivers’ insurance, doctors could be more hesitant to provide victims with crucial lien-based treatment. Doctor-led political action committee Providers for Patient Care has raised over $4 million to fight Uber’s initiative, claiming it would prevent treatment. 

Uber has also filed federal racketeering lawsuits against the Downtown LA Law Group and the law offices of Jacob Emrani in Southern California, claiming attorneys struck side agreements with doctors to increase medical bills through unnecessary procedures, resulting in lawyers receiving higher payouts.