If you ordered food through Grubhub, drove for the company, or ran a restaurant that appeared on its platforms, you may be covered by one of several Grubhub class action settlements now moving through the courts. Three private settlements are active as of mid-2026: a California consumer case over delivery and service fees, a $24.75 million California driver misclassification case, and a $7.1 million case brought by restaurants listed without their consent. A separate $25 million federal consent order with the FTC is also in effect but has not yet opened a public claims process.
Here is what each case covers, who qualifies, and how to file.
California Delivery Fee Settlement (Wang v. Grubhub)
This is the case most California customers will care about. Wang et al. v. Grubhub, Inc., filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court (Case No. 23STCV24118), alleges Grubhub made false or misleading representations about delivery fees, service fees, “California Drivers Benefits Fees,” and menu prices on delivery orders placed in California. The complaint was brought under California’s Unfair Competition Law, the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, and the state’s False Advertising Law.
Under the deal, each class member who files a valid claim receives a $10 Grubhub site credit. If the total credits issued to all claimants exceed $5 million, the per-person amount may be reduced pro rata. Judge Timothy Patrick Dillon granted preliminary approval on January 12, 2026.
Who qualifies: anyone who ordered and paid for food delivered by Grubhub independent contractors to a California address between January 24, 2019, and January 12, 2026.
How to file: submit a claim at ghdeliveryfeesettlement.com using the Unique ID from the email notice sent by the settlement administrator. If you no longer have the ID, you can request it in writing from the administrator.
Deadline: August 7, 2026, at 11:59 p.m. PST. The final approval hearing is set for August 10, 2026. No credits will be issued until the court grants final approval and any appeals are resolved.
California Driver Misclassification Settlement (Lawson v. Grubhub)
California delivery drivers have their own $24.75 million settlement. Lawson v. Grubhub Holdings Inc. (Case No. 15-cv-05128 JSC), filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, alleges Grubhub violated California labor law by classifying its delivery drivers as independent contractors rather than employees. The claims include failure to reimburse business expenses, failure to pay minimum wage and overtime, and violations of the state’s Unfair Competition Law.
The case has been running for nearly a decade. After the Ninth Circuit sent it back for reconsideration under the Dynamex “ABC test,” the trial court found Grubhub had misclassified its drivers for minimum wage and overtime purposes. Five rounds of mediation produced the $24.75 million agreement. Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley granted preliminary approval on March 13, 2026, after rejecting an earlier version in November 2025 over standing problems tied to Proposition 22.
Every class member who submits a valid, timely claim will receive at least $25. The settlement also allocates $2 million for penalties under the Private Attorneys General Act, with 75 percent going to the State of California and 25 percent to the class. Plaintiffs’ counsel plans to seek up to $8.25 million in fees, subject to court approval.
Who qualifies: current and former Grubhub delivery drivers in California who used the Grubhub app between December 3, 2014, and March 13, 2026.
How to file: submit a claim through the administrator, Simpluris, at grubhubcalsettlement.com.
Deadline: June 18, 2026, to file a claim or opt out. The final approval hearing is scheduled for July 30, 2026. Drivers who do nothing stay in the class and release their claims but receive no payment.
Restaurant Listing Settlement (Lynn Scott v. Grubhub)
Restaurants had a separate case, and it is now closed to new claims. Lynn Scott, LLC et al. v. Grubhub Inc. (Case No. 1:20-cv-06334, N.D. Ill.) alleged Grubhub listed roughly 387,000 businesses on its platforms without any contract, making consumers believe those restaurants had a formal partnership with the company. The affected platforms included Grubhub, Seamless, Eat24, Tapingo, OrderUp, LevelUp, AllMenus, MenuPages, and BiteGrabber.
The class covered businesses listed on those platforms without a contract between January 1, 2019, and April 30, 2024. Grubhub agreed to pay $7,154,586 and to stop listing businesses without their consent. Each valid claim was worth an initial $50 plus a pro rata amount based on how long the business was listed. Judge LaShonda A. Hunt granted final approval on April 15, 2026, resolving claims from more than 7,000 restaurants. Grubhub denied any wrongdoing.
The claim deadline was March 4, 2026, and claims are no longer being accepted.
The FTC and Illinois Consent Order
Separate from the private class actions, the Federal Trade Commission and Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul filed a joint enforcement action against Grubhub on December 17, 2024 (Case No. 1:24-cv-12923, N.D. Ill.). The complaint accused Grubhub of burying true delivery costs behind service and small-order fees, advertising “free” delivery on Grubhub+ while still charging fees, making cancellation of that subscription unreasonably difficult, blocking diner accounts holding gift card balances with no meaningful appeal, overstating driver pay in recruiting (allegedly promising up to $40 per hour when the median was closer to $10), and listing unaffiliated restaurants without consent.
The total monetary judgment was $140 million, partially suspended based on Grubhub’s representations about its ability to pay. Under the stipulated order entered December 31, 2024, Grubhub must pay $25 million, nearly all of it earmarked for consumer refunds. If Grubhub is later found to have misrepresented its financial condition, the full $140 million becomes immediately due. The FTC Commission voted 5-0 to authorize the order. Grubhub has denied the allegations.
The order also requires Grubhub to disclose the full cost of delivery upfront, simplify Grubhub+ cancellation, send annual subscription reminders, notify consumers before blocking accounts and offer an appeals process, stop listing restaurants without consent, and ensure driver earnings claims are accurate and evidence-based.
As of mid-2026, the FTC has not publicly announced whether the $25 million refund fund has begun paying consumers or established a claims process. If you believe you were affected by the conduct described in the FTC complaint, watch for notice from the agency rather than filing anywhere now.
Key Deadlines at a Glance
- Wang (California customers): claim by August 7, 2026 at ghdeliveryfeesettlement.com; final approval hearing August 10, 2026.
- Lawson (California drivers): claim or opt out by June 18, 2026 at grubhubcalsettlement.com; final approval hearing July 30, 2026.
- Lynn Scott (restaurants): closed to claims as of March 4, 2026; final approval granted April 15, 2026.
- FTC consent order: $25 million refund fund; no public claims process announced yet.
If you received an email notice from a settlement administrator, keep the Unique ID it contains, since that number is what the claim form asks for. If you think you qualify but never got a notice, contact the administrator listed for that case to request one before the deadline passes.