Wallace Miller partner Molly Condon Wells has filed an amicus brief for an upcoming Illinois Supreme Court case, supported by survivor advocacy and victims’ rights groups across the country. In the brief, she is advising the court on the legal ramifications of the upcoming decision and fighting to make sure that victims of sexual abuse will be able to make their voices heard in court.

Civil and criminal litigation brought against Uber after fatal crash

A Chicago woman is pursuing charges against the Uber rideshare company after a crash killed her husband and the driver in April 2022. She initially pursued both civil and criminal litigation, seeking accountability from the company for her injuries and the loss of her husband.  

Her legal action was divided into several cases, including a criminal case, a civil injury case, and a wrongful death claim on behalf of her husband. In all of these litigations, Uber attempted to compel arbitration and require her to deal with the matter outside of trial court. 

What does it mean to compel arbitration through an arbitration agreement? 

Arbitration is a process of seeking justice outside of the courts. Rather than going through the legal system and conducting a jury trial, parties present their arguments to an external arbitrator, who then makes a decision on the case. The parameters of arbitration depend on the individual circumstances and the arbitrator’s decisions are binding. 

In compelled or forced arbitration, a company or organization requires its customers, participants, or employees to waive their right to a trial by signing an arbitration provision in a written agreement. In order to use a service or access resources, like signing up for an Uber account or accepting a job offer, the individual must agree to an arbitration agreement.  

In these situations, the individual signs away their right to sue the company or join a class action. Any disputes they have in the future must go through the company’s arbitration process. 

When plaintiffs try to hold companies and organizations responsible for harm they cause, contracts that include such arbitration clauses can prevent them from seeking justice. Advocates are fighting to change the laws that allow forced arbitration agreements, but these contracts are still widespread. 

Wrongful death lawsuit proceeds to Illinois Supreme Court for ruling on arbitration clause

After her husband’s death, the plaintiff filed criminal and civil lawsuits against Uber for their responsibility in the rideshare crash. In response, the defendant filed to compel arbitration and force her to go through a confidential process rather than the courts. 

While district courts held that Uber is able to compel arbitration in most of the lawsuits filed (including the criminal case and civil procedures), the Circuit Court of Cook County denied the motion to compel arbitration in the wrongful death case. This allowed the wrongful death lawsuit to proceed in the trial process. However, the First District Appellate Court in Illinois reversed that decision in June 2025 and ruled that Uber is allowed to force arbitration on this case. 

As a result of the contradictory rulings from the circuit and appeals courts, the case will now go in front of the Illinois Supreme Court. They will make the final judgment on whether the plaintiff’s wrongful death case can be forced into arbitration, or whether she has the legal right to have her case heard in court, regardless of the arbitration agreement. 

What is an amicus brief? 

The Illinois Supreme Court will be scheduling hearings for the plaintiff’s case in 2026 before deciding whether or not Uber can force arbitration. In this interim time, attorneys and other experts can submit amicus briefs on the consequences of forced arbitration for the Court’s consideration. 

Amicus briefs are written arguments submitted to a court by someone who is not directly related to the action. These briefs provide context and advice on legal matters related to the case, including ramifications of a decision that the court may not have considered. In other words, these briefs help courts understand the scope of a potential ruling and the ripple effects it may have on existing law. 

The phrase comes from amicus curiae, or “friend of the court,” a term for the individuals who submit amicus briefs. Amici curiae (the plural of amicus curiae) may volunteer or be invited to present their arguments to the court.  

Uber and other defendants opposed the motion to allow amicus briefs in November 2025. They claim that briefs discussing the effects of forced arbitration on other areas of law, including sexual assault litigation, are not relevant to the case. However, the Supreme Court ruled that they would accept amicus briefs in December 2025. 

Beyond rideshare lawsuits: Why this decision matters for contractual arbitration 

In light of the Illinois Supreme Court’s upcoming ruling, Wallace Miller partner Molly Condon Wells drafted an amicus brief signed by the Women’s Bar Association of Illinois (WBAI), the Illinois Coalition Against Sexual Assault (ICASA), and the Victim Rights Law Center (VRLC). 

In the brief, Molly highlights how this ruling will affect not only forced arbitration in rideshare lawsuits, but also in sexual abuse cases. Forcing arbitration means that plaintiffs can’t pursue their cases in court, which in turn protects abusers in positions of power, from employers and church officials to teachers and doctors. 

Molly’s amicus brief also highlights existing Illinois law prohibiting forced arbitration for harassment and discrimination claims, as well as rulings by other Illinois courts against compelled arbitration. If the Supreme Court goes against the established law and supports Uber’s bid to force arbitration, it will not only contradict previous decisions, but also betray sexual abuse victims seeking justice.