Jan 27 (Reuters) - Nevada's highest court on Monday

rejected efforts by ride-hailing giant Uber Technologies ( UBER )

to cap the contingency fees lawyers can earn in civil

lawsuits to 20% of the amount their clients' recover.

The Nevada Supreme Court unanimously ruled that a proposed

statewide ballot initiative from Uber ( UBER ) and Nevadans for Fair

Recovery contained language that was "misleading and confusing."

It was unclear, for instance, whether contingency fees for

lawyers working on medical malpractice cases or on behalf of the

state of Nevada would also be capped, the court said.

Opponents of Uber's ( UBER ) proposed initiative, including a group

of Uber ( UBER ) riders who allege they were sexually assaulted by their

drivers, praised the high court's ruling.

"We're thrilled that the Nevada Supreme Court has

unanimously rejected Uber's ( UBER ) cynical scheme to sidestep

accountability for the countless sexual assault cases and other

harms it has enabled under its watch," Deepak Gupta of Gupta

Wessler, who represented the initiative's opponents, said in a

statement.

"Today's verdict is not the end of our efforts," Nevadans

for Fair Recovery said in a statement. "We plan to pursue an

aggressive campaign to educate voters about how billboard

attorneys have rigged the system to put their interests over

Nevadans."

A spokesperson for Uber ( UBER ) did not immediately respond to a

request for comment. Uber ( UBER ) has denied wrongdoing in sexual

assault and harassment litigation and said it has taken steps to

safeguard passengers.

The ballot initiative would have amended Nevada law, and

would have gone into effect in 2027. Had the Nevada Supreme

Court signed off on the proposed language, it would have gone to

the state legislature for a vote.

Opponents sued to block the ballot initiative last year,

asserting that it was misleading because it does not inform

prospective petition signers of potential effects of the fee

cap, like making it harder for plaintiffs to find lawyers to

handle their cases. But a Nevada district rejected those

arguments in May, finding them "too speculative and

hypothetical."

Nevada's proposed fee cap would have been the most

restrictive in the country, opponents said. Oklahoma and

Michigan impose fee caps in all civil cases but the limits are

50% and 33%, respectively. Several other states cap contingency

fees in medical malpractice cases, but the lowest limit is New

York's 30% cap.

The case is Uber Sexual Assault Survivors for Legal

Accountability, v. Uber Technologies Inc ( UBER ), Nevada Supreme Court,

No. 88813

For Uber Sexual Assault Survivors for Legal Accountability

and Nevada Justice Association: Deepak Gupta of Gupta Wessler

For Uber Technologies ( UBER ) and Nevadans for Fair Recovery: Daniel

Bravo of Bravo Schrager