Supreme Court Rules Negligent Hiring Claims Against Freight Brokers May Proceed

In a unanimous decision issued on May 14, 2026, the US Supreme Court held that federal law does not prevent injured motorists from pursuing certain negligence claims against freight brokers that arrange transportation services. 

The case, Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, arose from a devastating truck crash in Illinois. According to court records, commercial driver Shawn Montgomery was stopped on the side of the roadway when a truck operated by Yosniel Varela-Mojena veered off course and struck his tractor-trailer. Montgomery suffered catastrophic injuries, including the loss of a leg. 

At the time of the collision, Varela-Mojena was driving for Caribe Transport II, LLC, a motor carrier that had been selected by freight broker C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. to transport a shipment. Montgomery later filed suit against multiple parties, including C.H. Robinson. 

Montgomery alleged that the broker negligently hired Caribe Transport despite warning signs regarding the company’s safety history. The lawsuit pointed to safety concerns involving driver qualifications, hours-of-service compliance, vehicle maintenance, and crash history. Montgomery argued C.H. Robinson either knew or should have known that hiring the carrier created an unreasonable risk of harm. 

The case eventually made its way to the US Supreme Court. At issue was whether Montgomery’s negligent hiring claim was barred by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA), a federal law that limits certain state regulations involving the trucking industry. Lower courts found that federal law barred the claim and dismissed it.

The Supreme Court reached a different conclusion. Writing for a unanimous Court, Justice Amy Coney Barrett explained that the FAAAA includes a safety exception that preserves a state’s authority to regulate matters involving motor vehicle safety. Because the negligent hiring claims concern the safe operation of commercial vehicles, the Court found that they fall within that exception.  

The decision allows Montgomery’s claim against C.H. Robinson to move forward and resolve a disagreement among federal appellate courts on the issue. It also confirms that freight brokers may still face liability under state law when they allegedly fail to use reasonable care in selecting motor carriers. 

Why This Supreme Court Decision Matters 

While the case centered on whether federal law shields freight brokers from negligent hiring claims, it also attracted attention from trucking safety advocates across the country. Attorneys at Dollar, Burns, Becker & Hershewe submitted an amicus brief on behalf of three national truck safety organizations urging the Court to preserve these claims as an important tool for promoting safer carrier selection. 

The brief argued that freight brokers occupy a unique position within the transportation industry because they often decide which carriers are entrusted with moving freight across the country. Brokers have access to extensive safety data and are in the best position to identify carriers with troubling safety records before a load is assigned. 

The amicus brief emphasized the amount of safety information available to brokers before they hire a carrier. Federal databases contain information about inspections, crashes, maintenance violations, hours-of-service issues, and other safety indicators. Research cited in the brief found that many of those indicators can help predict future crash risk. The Supreme Court cited the amicus brief submitted by Dollar, Burns, Becker & Hershewe, authored by partner Jeff Burns, in its opinion. 

The amicus brief also argued that negligent hiring claims encourage brokers to take that information seriously. When brokers are expected to exercise reasonable care when selecting carriers, they have a greater incentive to consider safety records rather than focusing exclusively on price or availability.

The amicus brief argued that eliminating those claims could weaken an important source of accountability within the industry. Without the possibility of liability, brokers may have less reason to avoid carriers with known safety problems, potentially allowing more unsafe trucks to operate on public roads. 

In the amicus brief, our firm urged the Court to find that negligent hiring claims against freight brokers are protected by the FAAAA’s safety exception. In a unanimous decision, the Court ultimately adopted an interpretation of the FAAAA that aligned with the position advocated in the amicus brief and by the organizations it represented. By reversing the Seventh Circuit and ruling in Montgomery’s favor, the Court preserved the ability of injured people to pursue these claims under state law. 

This decision reinforces the idea that companies involved in the transportation chain can play an important role in preventing crashes before they occur. By allowing negligent hiring claims to proceed, the Court’s ruling preserves a legal mechanism that encourages brokers to consider safety performance when selecting carriers. 

The decision marks one of the most significant Supreme Court rulings involving freight broker liability in recent years. By confirming that negligent hiring claims can fall within the FAAAA’s safety exception, the Court preserved a pathway for injured motorists to seek accountability while reinforcing the importance of safety in carrier-selection decisions.