Transportation Executive Summary: United States Supreme Court Grants Certiorari for FAAAA Negligent Hiring Case
Recently the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to hear a negligent hiring case involving the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA) from a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, No. 24-1192. The decision of the Seventh Circuit is reported at 124 F.4th 1053. Certiorari was granted to resolve a split among federal circuit courts as to whether the express preemption provision of the FAAAA bars a negligent hiring claim against a freight broker based on the broker’s selection of a motor carrier, and if it does, whether the safety exception applies to allow the claim to proceed. This decision is of great importance to the transportation industry because the federal circuit split has left freight brokers subject to varying degrees of risk depending on the state in which goods are transported, which increases litigation and raises insurance costs.
Facts and Procedural History
This case arose from an accident where a driver of a tractor-trailer hauling a load of plastic pots veered off the road and struck the tractor-trailer of Shawn Montgomery, which was stopped along the shoulder of an Illinois highway. Montgomery was severely injured and he sued the driver of the tractor-trailer (Yosniel Varela-Mojena), the carrier (Caribe Transport II, LLC), and the freight broker that arranged delivery of the shipment (C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc.). Montgomery alleged that (1) C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (CHR) is vicariously liable for the torts of the driver and carrier and (2) CHR negligently hired the driver and carrier. The district court granted partial summary judgment in CHR’s favor by finding that CHR was not vicariously liable for the driver or motor carrier because they were independent contractors and not agents of CHR. Later, the court entered judgement in favor of CHR on the negligent hiring claims due to precedent from the Seventh Circuit in Ye v. GlobalTranz Enterprises, Inc., 74 F.4th 453 (7th Cir. 2023), which held that the FAAAA preempts state negligent hiring claims against freight brokers. The Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision. Montgomery sought review from the United States Supreme Court. CHR also sought review from the United States Supreme Court despite prevailing in both the federal district court and Seventh Circuit because it sought to provide clarity to the freight brokerage industry. The United States Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case.
Questions Presented and Argument
The common law and most (if not all) states permit a cause of action for negligent selection. For example, an individual injured in an accident caused by a driver transporting goods can bring a cause of action against a person who negligently selected the driver to transport the goods. In the mid-1990’s, however, Congress passed the FAAAA and the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act (ICCTA), which preempted a wide array of local and state regulations and laws that affected motor carriers and freight brokers in an effort to eliminate conflicting local/state laws and regulations and promote interstate commerce. Specifically, the FAAAA preempts state laws “related to a price, route, or service of any motor carrier . . . or any motor private carrier, broker, or freight forwarder with respect to the transportation of property.” 49 U.S.C. § 14501(c)(1). However, Congress also provided a safety exception whereby the FAAAA does not preempt “the safety regulatory authority of a State with respect to motor vehicles.” 49 U.S.C. § 14501(c)(2)(A). Thus, the question presented is two-fold: (1) does the FAAAA preempt state law negligent hiring claims based on a freight broker’s selection of a motor carrier and, if it does, (2) does the safety exception applies to allow the claim to proceed? Beyond the technical arguments made about the language of the FAAAA, Montgomery argues from a public policy perspective that “truck crashes are a serious problem” and without either holding that (1) the FAAAA preemption does not apply or if it does, (2) that the safety exception does apply, then freight brokers will be immune from liability “[n]o matter how dangerous the carrier or driver is, and no matter if the broker has actual knowledge of the danger.”
Other Circuits
Four other circuits have addressed these questions. The Seventh and Eleventh Circuits have held that (1) the express preemption of the FAAAA does preempt state negligent hiring causes of action against freight brokers and (2) the safety exception does not apply because the claims against freight brokers are not “with respect to motor vehicles.” Ye v. GlobalTranz Enters., Inc., 74 F.4th 453, 460-63 (7th Cir. 2023); Aspen Am. Ins. Co. v. Landstar Ranger, Inc., 65 F. 4th 1261, 1268 (11th Cir. 2023). By contrast, the Sixth and Ninth Circuits have held that although (1) negligent hiring claims against freight brokers are expressly preempted by the FAAAA, (2) the safety exception does apply to allow the claims to go forward. Cox v. Total Quality Logistics, Inc., 142 F.4th 847, 853-58 (6th Cir. 2025); Miller v. C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc., 976 F.3d 1016, 1025-31 (9th Cir. 2020).
Conclusion
The United States Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision on this case in the first half of 2026. Once issued, the Court’s decision will be binding on all courts in the United States and, thus, the decision will resolve the circuit split and provide much needed clarity to the transportation industry.
For More Information
Contact John F. Fatino for more information about trucking and transportation matters at 515-288-6041. Shay A. Slifka assisted in the preparation of these materials.