Grubhub Settles Long-Running Driver Employee Classification Case

Food delivery app Grubhub Inc. settled a decade old legal case involving claims that it misclassified drivers as independent contractors instead of employees.

The US District Court for the Northern District of California said in a Monday docket entry that the parties had reached a settlement and it vacated a short bench trial scheduled this week on the issue of penalties for minimum wage violations.

Grubhub attorney Theane Evangelis of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP said in a statement that the parties “reached a resolution that we believe is in the best interest of Grubhub” and applauded California voters for passing Prop. 22, a ballot initiative that classifies app-based gig workers as independent contractors. She didn’t respond to questions about the details of the settlement.

An attorney for the plaintiff Raef Lawson didn’t immediately return requests for comment.

The accord caps off a long and meandering case over employee classification under California law and the ability of workers to bring employment lawsuits under a unique state statute called the Private Attorneys General Act.

Lawson, who worked for the delivery service for four months, sued the app-based platform in 2015, arguing he was misclassified as an independent contractor and was eligible to worker protections as an employee.

Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley initially ruled in favor of Grubhub, but after a number of appeals and changes in California classification law, the judge ruled in 2023 that Lawson is an employee, not an independent contractor. But Corley said Lawson is entitled to only $65 in damages for his minimum wage claims.

Corley later ruled that Lawson could only pursue PAGA penalties for minimum wage violations between 2014 and 2020, the year Prop. 22 took effect.

Lichten & Liss-Riordan PC represents Lawson.

The case is Lawson v Grubhub Inc., N.D. Cal., No. 3:15-cv-05128, 4/7/25.