The Supreme Court handed down a unanimous decision Thursday in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, ruling that federal law does not block injured drivers from suing freight brokers who negligently hire unsafe trucking companies.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote the opinion. All nine justices agreed.

The case centers on Shawn Montgomery, a truck driver who lost part of his leg after his parked tractor-trailer was struck by another truck on an Illinois road. The driver who hit him, Yosniel Varela-Mojena, was hauling a load of plastic pots for Caribe Transport. C.H. Robinson Worldwide, the country’s largest freight broker, had coordinated the shipment.

Montgomery alleged that C.H. Robinson negligently hired the motor carrier and driver despite safety red flags. C.H. Robinson argued that a federal statute, the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act, preempted state-law claims like Montgomery’s. The Seventh Circuit agreed and tossed the case. The Supreme Court reversed that decision and sent the case back.

The core of the ruling is straightforward: states retain the authority to regulate safety with respect to motor vehicles, and a negligent-hiring claim fits squarely within that retained authority. Barrett’s opinion makes clear that this exception to federal preemption applies even when the defendant is a freight broker rather than a trucking company itself.

The Supreme Court laid out the case and holding this way:

Shawn Montgomery sustained severe and permanent injuries after his parked tractor-trailer was struck by a truck driven by Yosniel Varela-Mojena while carrying a load for Caribe Transport in Illinois. C.H. Robinson Worldwide, a transportation broker, had coordinated the shipment. Montgomery alleged that C.H. Robinson was liable because it negligently hired the driver and carrier despite safety red flags, including a safety rating that allegedly showed problems involving driver qualifications, hours of service, inspection, repair, maintenance, and crash rate.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote for a unanimous Court that the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act does not preempt this type of negligent-hiring claim because states retain safety regulatory authority with respect to motor vehicles. The Court reversed and remanded the Seventh Circuit’s decision. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Justice Samuel Alito, wrote separately to emphasize that the decision does not mean brokers will routinely be liable after truck accidents.

That Kavanaugh concurrence is worth reading carefully. He and Justice Samuel Alito agreed with the result but wanted to make sure the ruling was not read as a blank check. Their point: just because a lawsuit can proceed past this federal-preemption barrier does not mean freight brokers will face automatic liability every time there is a crash.

The practical implications are significant.

AP described the industry stakes this way:

The Supreme Court allowed Shawn Montgomery to sue C.H. Robinson after he lost part of his leg in a semi tractor-trailer crash, a ruling that could have major ripple effects across the trucking industry. C.H. Robinson is the country’s largest freight broker by size, and brokers could now face more pressure to consider safety records when selecting carriers rather than focusing only on speed and price. The decision opens the door to more liability exposure for freight brokers, which sit between shippers and the trucking companies that physically move the freight.

The ruling does not mean Montgomery necessarily wins his lawsuit, because C.H. Robinson is contesting the claims on the merits. AP also reported that the Trump administration and companies such as Amazon had warned that letting the suit proceed could expose logistics companies to liability under a patchwork of state laws. One logistics executive told AP that brokers may now have to pay closer attention to the safety records of carriers they contract with to haul all kinds of goods, including hazardous materials.

That last point is notable. The Trump administration and Amazon both filed arguments warning against opening the door to a web of state-by-state litigation. The Court was not persuaded, at least not on the preemption question.

The ruling lands at a moment when the Department of Transportation is already pushing hard on commercial-driver safety. In February, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy finalized a rule aimed at stopping unqualified foreign drivers from operating big rigs on American roads. That action followed emergency steps to end the issuance of non-domiciled CDLs to truckers with unverified driving histories, and it connected to broader enforcement of longstanding English-language proficiency requirements for commercial operators.

The Department of Transportation has been moving separately on that broader trucking-safety front:

DOT announced in February that Secretary Sean Duffy finalized a rule intended to stop unqualified foreign drivers from operating big rigs on American roads. The department said the reforms followed emergency action to end the issuance of non-domiciled CDLs to truckers with unverified driving histories after a surge of deadly crashes involving non-domiciled drivers. DOT framed the move as part of the Trump administration’s push to put the safety of the driving public first and restore integrity to commercial trucking.

The department also connected the broader campaign to English-language enforcement for commercial motor vehicle operators, saying drivers who fail to meet longstanding English-language proficiency requirements can be placed out of service. That does not mean the Supreme Court case itself was about immigration status, CDL testing, or English proficiency. It means the ruling lands in the middle of a larger national fight over who is responsible when unsafe commercial drivers are allowed onto American roads.

Those DOT policies address a different set of problems than the one the Supreme Court decided Thursday, but they share a common thread: when freight companies cut corners on safety, people get hurt on American highways.

Montgomery has not won his lawsuit. He has won the right to bring it. The preemption shield that freight brokers relied on to avoid state negligent-hiring claims is gone, and every broker in the country now operates under a simple new reality: if you contract with an unsafe carrier and someone gets maimed on the highway, you can be hauled into court to answer for it. Safety vetting is no longer a paperwork detail. It is a legal obligation with teeth.

This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.
 

Join The Conversation. Leave a Comment.