Juno USA LP is facing a class action lawsuit. The suit notes the mobile taxi company is offering equity ownership to Uber and Lyft drivers in New York. However, the lawsuit claims Juno USA LP didn’t deliver on its promises. The plaintiffs filed the suit against the company in the federal court of New York.
Mohammed Gangat of Law Office of Mohammed Gangat and Philip M. Hines of Held & Hines LLP are representing the plaintiffs who filed the proposed lawsuit.
Mohammed Razzak, Mohammad Siddique, and Mohammad Islam are the plaintiffs who state they used to work as drivers in New York. So, they worked from 50 to 60 hours on a weekly basis. According to the Juno class action lawsuit, the plaintiffs worked for different companies.
It’s worth noting Juno USA LP became a competitor to Uber and Lyft a few years ago. The suit refers to the company’s strategy as ‘’simple and brilliant.’’ The goal was to attract drivers that already have sufficient work experience and can become mobile taxi drivers in New York.
The lawsuit also adds that the company did it in a ‘’sinister fashion.’’ Thus, drivers went on working for Lyft and Uber while promoting Juno USA LP to both Uber’s and Lyft’s customers.
In order to attract drivers, the company offered them a quite enticing option. In other words, Juno promised equity ownership. According to the information provided by the plaintiffs, the strategy used by the mobile taxi company is quite effective, as Juno turned into a ‘’modern day startup fairy tale’ ’in New York.
As a result, experienced drivers with good credentials started working for Juno. In this way, the company entered the market successfully. According to the class action lawsuit, the company then sold itself for $200 million.
The plaintiffs claim almost all the drivers of Juno decided to accept $100 in shares of the mobile taxi company. However, they point out these shares mainly had no worth at all. The reason is that Juno just stopped the process of granting shares to drivers.
The plaintiffs who filed the lawsuit against Juno seek to represent any person who used to work for Juno in the U.S. In addition to that, they are seeking to represent three subclasses.
The first subclass refers to those Juno drivers who got restricted stock units (RSUs). The second one represents those class members who made a decision of receiving $100 in RSUs instead of $100 in cash. The third one applies to any Juno driver who didn’t get the benefits the company promised for referrals.
The suit alleges Juno USA LP of false advertising, as well as breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and conversion. The allegations also include misrepresentation and shareholder derivative claims. The plaintiffs are seeking monetary damages, injunctive relief, and restitution.