Supreme Court holds brokers liable

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on May 14 that freight brokers can be sued under state negligence law when the trucking companies they hire cause crashes, rejecting a defense the industry had used to block many claims. In a 9-0 opinion in *Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC*, Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote that the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act does not preempt negligent-hiring claims against brokers because states retain safety authority “with respect to motor vehicles.” The case arose from a December 7, 2017 crash on Interstate 70 in Illinois in which Shawn Montgomery was severely injured after a tractor-trailer driven by Yosniel Varela-Mojena struck his stopped vehicle, according to the Supreme Court syllabus and SCOTUSblog’s account of the litigation. C.H. Robinson Worldwide had arranged the shipment for Caribe Transport II, and Montgomery alleged the broker knew or should have known the carrier was an unsafe choice. (supremecourt.gov) ### Why did this case matter beyond one crash? The Supreme Court said the ruling resolves a split among federal appeals courts over whether brokers could use the FAAAA’s preemption clause to defeat state negligent-hiring suits. Before the decision, some courts dismissed those claims while others allowed them to proceed, leaving outcomes dependent on jurisdiction. (supremecourt.gov) 9News reported that trucking-safety lawyers had described that patchwork as a system in which broker accountability varied from court to court. Grant Lawson, managing partner of the Rocky Mountain Division for The Law Firm for Truck Safety, told the station that “up until last week, it was the Wild West.” (supremecourt.gov) ### What exactly did the justices decide? Justice Barrett’s opinion said even if the FAAAA’s preemption language would otherwise reach Montgomery’s claim, the statute’s safety exception preserves it. The Court said common-law duties, including the duty to use reasonable care in hiring a contractor for dangerous work, are part of a state’s safety authority. (9news.com) The opinion focused on whether negligent-hiring claims are “with respect to motor vehicles” under the statute. The Court answered yes, holding that a claim over selecting a motor carrier for highway transport concerns motor-vehicle safety closely enough to fall within the exception. ### What facts in the record made the broker-vetting issue central? (supremecourt.gov) SCOTUSblog said Montgomery alleged federal regulators had given Caribe Transport II a “conditional” safety rating when C.H. Robinson hired it, citing deficiencies in driver qualification, hours of service and crash rates. DLA Piper, summarizing the ruling, said the underlying carrier had been cited for non-compliance involving driver qualification, hours-of-service and maintenance requirements. (supremecourt.gov) 9News said Lawson pointed to carriers with poor safety records that shut down and reopen under new names, a practice known as using “chameleon” companies. He said future cases will turn on whether a broker “did its job” before putting a carrier on the road. ### What changes now for brokers, shippers and project logistics teams? (scotusblog.com) DLA Piper said the ruling removes a federal preemption defense that brokers had relied on in motor-carrier selection cases, increasing exposure for brokers and, in practice, putting more attention on carrier-vetting records, safety ratings and documentation. That is an inference from the legal holding and post-ruling legal analysis, not a new regulatory mandate. (9news.com) For heavy-haul and project cargo, that means the paper trail around who selected a carrier, what safety information was reviewed, and why a load was assigned may matter more in litigation after a crash. The Supreme Court did not create a new federal vetting standard; it said state negligence claims can go forward. ### What happens next in the courts? (dlapiper.com) The Supreme Court’s decision means Montgomery’s negligent-hiring claim is no longer barred on the preemption ground accepted by the lower courts. The case returns to the lower courts for further proceedings, where the facts of C.H. Robinson’s carrier selection and what it knew about Caribe Transport II’s safety record will be tested under state negligence law. (supremecourt.gov)