Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, U.S. Supreme Court, May 14, 2026
A catastrophic trucking accident resulted in severe injuries, including amputation, after a motor carrier struck a stopped tractor trailer. The plaintiff alleged negligent hiring against a transportation broker that selected the carrier despite an alleged poor safety history. The United States Supreme Court resolved a long-standing split among federal courts and held that negligent hiring claims against brokers are not preempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA).
The FAAAA broadly preempts state laws related to prices, routes, and services of motor carriers and brokers. However, the Court emphasized the statute’s safety exception, which preserves a state’s authority to regulate safety with respect to motor vehicles. The Court held:
• Negligent hiring claims are part of a state’s safety regulatory authority
• These claims “concern” motor vehicles because they relate to the safety of trucks used in transportation
• Negligent hiring claims against brokers fall within the safety exception and are not preempted
Why This Matters for Claims
This decision reframes broker liability as a safety issue tied to carrier selection. Claims professionals should adjust investigation, reserving, and litigation strategy accordingly, with increased focus on safety records and broker due diligence.
Brokers are Now Routine Defendants – Brokers will no longer be dismissed early based on preemption arguments alone. Expect brokers to remain in most catastrophic loss litigation involving questionable carrier safety history.
Expanded Exposure – Broker involvement may increase total case value given perceived financial strength and jury perceptions. Claims involving adverse safety records will be particularly vulnerable.
Focus Shifts to Conduct, Not Preemption – The primary defense is no longer legal preemption. The focus is now on whether the broker acted reasonably in selecting the carrier.
Claims Handling Considerations
1. Early Investigation
• Obtain carrier safety data, including FMCSA ratings and inspection history
• Identify any prior violations involving driver qualification, hours of service, or maintenance
• Evaluate broker vetting procedures and documentation
2. Discovery Risk Areas
• Internal broker communications regarding carrier selection
• Policies or checklists used to approve carriers
• Knowledge of prior incidents or safety deficiencies
3. Liability Analysis
Evaluate whether the broker:
• Selected a federally registered carrier
• Followed established qualification protocols
• Had actual or constructive knowledge of safety issues
4. Defense Strategy Considerations
• Emphasize reasonableness of the broker’s selection process
• Demonstrate reliance on objective safety data and industry standards
• Highlight absence of red flags or actionable safety concerns at the time of selection
• Develop proximate cause defenses, particularly where the accident is unrelated to any known safety issue
5. Coverage and Risk Transfer
• Review broker carrier agreements for indemnity obligations
• Evaluate additional insured provisions and tender opportunities
• Anticipate multi carrier allocation disputes
Conclusion
In light of the United States Supreme Court’s decision, brokers must be evaluated through a safety-focused negligence lens rather than relying on preemption defenses. This shift increases exposure in catastrophic trucking cases and requires defense attorneys and claims professionals to prioritize early investigation, rigorous review of carrier safety histories, and careful assessment of broker due diligence. Going forward, effective litigation strategy will depend on documentation, coordination among parties, and a proactive approach to liability and coverage issues in multi-party litigation.
