A federal judge in Brooklyn dismissed a lawsuit on Friday that Uber Technologies filed against three New York law firms. Uber had alleged that the firms violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act by collaborating with doctors to exaggerate or fabricate injury claims to obtain higher legal settlements.
The case, which also named a group of doctors and individual lawyers as defendants, is one of at least four similar RICO lawsuits Uber has initiated against personal injury attorneys across the United States over the last two years. While civil RICO provisions allow for tripled damages, Uber's amended complaint, filed in July 2025, did not specify a total dollar amount for sought damages.
U.S. District Judge Orelia Merchant ruled that Uber failed to provide evidence that the law firms—Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro, Moses & Halperin; Banilov & Associates; and the Lavelle Law Firm—benefited from their relationship with doctors through illicit means. Merchant stated the associations appeared to be "commonplace fee-sharing arrangements, client referrals, and medical testimony, not bribes." The defendant law firms had previously denied the claims.
The judge also found that Uber could not yet prove it had suffered concrete harm because several of the underlying injury cases are still being litigated. Specifically, of the five cases cited by Uber in its amended complaint, three remain pending in New York state court. Merchant noted that until those cases are resolved, it is unclear if Uber will prevail or if it can use other legal remedies, such as counterclaims, to reduce its costs.
For the legal and medical professionals involved, the dismissal maintains the status quo for "commonplace" professional relationships, such as medical referrals and fee-sharing. The ruling suggests that without specific evidence of bribery or direct illicit benefit, these standard industry practices do not meet the threshold for federal racketeering charges. This sets a high bar for corporations seeking to use RICO to sue plaintiffs' attorneys over alleged fraud in state-level personal injury cases, impacting how such disputes are litigated in the future.
The immediate impact is centered in New York, but the outcome may influence Uber's strategy in three other pending federal lawsuits involving similar allegations in Los Angeles, Miami, and Philadelphia. While the New York claims against the law firms and doctors were dismissed on Friday, Uber retains the ability to pursue costs or sanctions within the three individual injury cases still pending in state court. The litigation in California, Florida, and Pennsylvania continues, with no trial dates or deadlines for those specific cases reported.