When Curiosity Meets Advocacy: Spotlighting Abraham Metz’s Work on Rideshare and Delivery Liability
At our firm, some of the most meaningful work doesn’t just happen in the courtroom—it starts with curiosity.
That’s exactly what happened with one of our law clerks, Abraham Metz.
During his time with us, Abe dug into an issue we confront more and more in practice: how rideshare and food delivery companies are shaping driver behavior—and, in turn, roadway safety. What started as conversations in the office evolved into a thoughtful law review article that tackles some of the most pressing and underexamined questions in this space.
Abe explored how “gamification” in food delivery apps—reward systems, time pressures, and incentives—can push drivers toward distracted driving and speeding. For those of us litigating these cases, that framing is powerful. It shifts the focus from isolated driver error to systemic design choices made by corporations.
He also analyzed a tragic Arizona case, Mroz v. Grubhub, where a pedestrian was killed by a driver distracted by the delivery app. What makes that case particularly significant is the willingness of the court to allow a products liability theory to proceed—recognizing that the app itself, and the way it demands driver interaction, may play a role in causing harm. That’s a theory we expect to see more of in the years ahead.
And then there’s the issue that should concern everyone: coverage gaps. Abe highlighted that for a substantial portion of a delivery driver’s working time—when they are logged in and waiting for orders—many companies provide little or no insurance coverage. That leaves injured victims, and often the drivers themselves, dangerously exposed.
These insights are explored in greater depth in Abe’s article, Beyond the Old Holes: A Defect-Specific Approach for Strict Liability in the Food Delivery Industry (2026) (unpublished comment) (on file with author).
This is the kind of work that matters. It reflects a deeper understanding of how corporate structures, technology, and incentives intersect with public safety. It’s also a reminder that the next generation of lawyers is not just learning the law—they’re questioning it, testing it, and helping shape where it goes next.
Abe brought that mindset to our office every day. He was thoughtful, engaged, and genuinely committed to understanding the “why” behind the cases we handle.
We’re incredibly proud of the work he’s done here, and even more excited to see where he goes next.
Wishing you all the best, Abe—you’re going to do great things.
