In MD Islam v. Lyft, the Southern District of New York, noting “that this is a close question that has divided courts to date, sided with those holding “that rideshare drivers in the United States are a ‘class of workers engaged in . . . interstate commerce,’ 9 U.S.C. § 1, such that the Federal Arbitration Act cannot be the basis to compel Plaintiff to arbitrate his claims.” Victory for the putative plaintiff class of Lyft drivers was short-lived, however, as the court held that under New York state law arbitration still was required in that “[t]he language of the contract, which repeatedly emphasizes that the parties ‘agree[d] to waive [their] respective rights to resolution of disputes in a court of law…clearly demonstrates the parties’ intent to arbitrate disputes.'”
positivelyneutral.com 