In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court has allowed a suit alleging negligent hiring by a freight broker to move forward. In Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, decided on May 14, 2026, the Court held that the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act, 49 U.S.C. § 14501 (c) (the ‘FAAAA”) did not preempt a suit for negligent hiring under state law.
The case arose after petitioner Shawn Montgomery sustained injuries when his vehicle was struck by a truck operated by motor carrier Caribe Transport II, LLC (“Caribe”). Freight broker C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. (“CHR”) arranged the transportation. Montgomery alleged that CHR was liable because under state law negligence concepts, it knew (or should have known) that Caribe had an allegedly poor safety record.
Writing for a unanimous Court, Justice Amy Coney Barrett framed the central issue as whether Montgomery’s cause of action created under state law for negligent hiring was a claim “with respect to motor vehicles,” and thus fell within the FAAAA’s vehicle safety exception to preemption. Because the FAAAA does not define that phrase, the Court interpreted it to mean “concerns” or “regards.” Applying that reading, the Court concluded that requiring a freight broker to exercise ordinary care when selecting a motor carrier directly “concerns” the motor vehicles that will be on the road. On that basis, the Court found that negligent hiring claims are within the vehicle “safety exception” to FAAAA preemption, which preserves a limited amount of state authority to regulate interstate motor vehicle safety.
The Court’s opinion fundamentally changes the legal landscape for freight brokers, motor carriers, shippers and others in the transportation industry. The Court’s decision places a heightened (and uncertain) burden on freight brokers to conduct due diligence when selecting motor carriers. Freight brokers can no longer rely on federal registration of a motor carrier alone as a defense against negligent hiring claims. The Court also noted that Congress, in enacting the FAAAA, sought economic deregulation, but not safety deregulation, making it difficult to read the FAAAA to shield freight brokers from state tort liability while leaving motor carriers exposed to state tort law claims. As a result of this ruling, freight brokers may now face state tort claims where previously such claims were barred and preempted by federal law.
In response, freight brokers should consider their motor carrier vetting and onboarding process, review the indemnification and insurance provisions in their shipper and carrier agreements and ensure their liability coverage reflects the new litigation environment. Motor carriers should also expect heightened scrutiny of their safety ratings, driver qualification records and maintenance history.
Our transportation law practice group has represented fright brokers, motor carriers and freight forwarders in complex commercial trucking litigation for decades. We understand the operational realities of the transportation industry and the legal strategies to protect our clients. If your business has been named in a trucking accident lawsuit, or if you want to evaluate your exposure in light of Montgomery, consider contacting our transportation law practice group for a free consultation.
