You cannot bring or participate in a class action lawsuit or representative proceeding against DoorDash; any legal claim must be brought individually.
This analysis describes what DoorDash's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology
This clause structures dispute resolution to proceed on an individual rather than collective basis, which affects how claims can be aggregated and the procedural mechanisms available for addressing disputes between the parties.
Interpretive note: Enforceability of this waiver for claims seeking public injunctive relief under California law is unsettled following McGill v. Citibank; application may vary by claim type and jurisdiction.
If DoorDash harms a large number of users in the same way, such as through a data breach or systematic overcharging, each affected user would have to pursue their own individual claim rather than joining a group lawsuit, which makes legal action significantly less practical for small-value harms.
How other platforms handle this
You and Teachable agree to resolve any disputes through final and binding arbitration, except as set forth under Exceptions to Agreement to Arbitrate below. You also agree that disputes will only be resolved on an individual basis and not as a class, consolidated, or representative action.
Any dispute arising from or relating to the subject matter of these Terms shall be finally settled by arbitration in San Francisco County, California, in accordance with the Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures of Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc. ("JAMS") then in effect, by ...
WHERE PERMITTED UNDER THE APPLICABLE LAW, YOU AND NETFLIX AGREE THAT EACH MAY BRING CLAIMS AGAINST THE OTHER ONLY IN YOUR OR ITS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY, AND NOT AS A PLAINTIFF OR CLASS MEMBER IN ANY PURPORTED CLASS OR REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDING. Further, where permitted under the applicable law, unless ...
Monitoring
DoorDash has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 25 platforms.
"YOU AND DOORDASH AGREE THAT EACH MAY BRING CLAIMS AGAINST THE OTHER ONLY IN YOUR OR ITS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY AND NOT AS A PLAINTIFF OR CLASS MEMBER IN ANY PURPORTED CLASS OR REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDING.— Excerpt from DoorDash's DoorDash Terms of Service
1) REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: The enforceability of class action waivers in consumer contracts is governed at the federal level by the FAA as interpreted in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion (2011) and subsequent Supreme Court decisions, which generally permit such waivers. However, the California Supreme Court's McGill v. Citibank (2017) decision held that waivers of the right to seek public injunctive relief in any forum are unenforceable under California law, creating a potential carve-out that interacts with this provision. 2) GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: High. The class action waiver is a standard feature of large consumer platform agreements, but it faces ongoing litigation and legislative challenges. Its enforceability in specific California and Washington state consumer contexts may be limited depending on the nature of the claim and remedy sought. 3) JURISDICTION FLAGS: California (McGill rule on public injunctive relief), Washington state (consumer protection act claims), and the EU (Unfair Contract Terms Directive) represent jurisdictions where this waiver may face enforceability limitations. 4) CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: The waiver applies to all users including merchants and Dashers using the same agreement framework; separate assessment is needed for commercial parties. 5) COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Legal teams should monitor California and federal court decisions on class waiver enforceability and assess whether any pending legislative proposals (including at the federal level) would affect enforceability of this clause.
Full compliance analysis
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Free: track 1 platform + weekly digest. Monitor: 25 platforms + same-day alerts. No credit card required.
Coinbase's User Agreement includes a mandatory arbitration clause that most users may not have reviewed. Here is what the clause states and how the opt-out process works.
561 arbitration provisions across 197 platforms. ConductAtlas tracks how dispute resolution is being restructured across the internet.
Compliance Governance Intelligence
Need to monitor specific governance provisions?
Compliance includes provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, regulatory mapping, and audit-ready analysis.
Built from archived source documents, structured governance mappings, and historical version tracking.
This clause structures dispute resolution to proceed on an individual rather than collective basis, which affects how claims can be aggregated and the procedural mechanisms available for addressing disputes between the parties.
If DoorDash harms a large number of users in the same way, such as through a data breach or systematic overcharging, each affected user would have to pursue their own individual claim rather than joining a group lawsuit, which makes legal action significantly less practical for small-value harms.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 86 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by DoorDash.