Middle District of Alabama and Eastern District of Louisiana Hold That Negligent Hiring/Contracting Claims Against Broker and/or Shipper are Preempted by the FAAAA and Not Saved by the “Safety Exception”

On September 4, 2024, the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama held that Plaintiffs’ claims for negligent hiring and contracting against a broker and a shipper were: 1) preempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (“FAAAA”) found in 49 U.S.C. § 14501(c)(1), and 2) not saved by the “safety exception” found in 49 U.S.C. § 14501(c)(2)(A). See Bradley v. Big’s Trucking, No. 2:23-CV-122-ECM, 2024 WL 4045467 (M.D. Al. Sep. 4, 2024).

In Bradley, the alleged broker, Commercial Express, Inc. (“Commercial Express”), contracted with a motor carrier, Big’s Trucking, to transport a load. An accident occurred with the plaintiffs that resulted in severe injuries and one of the minor passengers died. The plaintiffs filed a wrongful death lawsuit against numerous defendants, including Commercial Express and the alleged shipper, AmerisourceBergen Drug Corp. (“ABCD”), claiming they negligently hired/contracted Big’s Trucking. Commercial Express and ABCD filed motions for summary judgment, arguing the claims were preempted by the FAAAA and not saved by the “safety exception.”

The district court agreed with Commercial Express and ABCD that the negligent hiring/contracting claims against them were preempted by the FAAAA and that the claims did not fall within the “safety exception” by primarily relying upon recent decisions out of the Eleventh Circuit. See Gauthier v. Hard to Stop LLC, 2024 WL 3338944, at *2 (11th Cir. July 9, 2024); Aspen Am. Ins. Co. v. Landstar Ranger, Inc., 65 F.4th 1261, 1266 (11th Cir. 2023); see also Creagan v. Wal-Mart Transp., LLC, 354 F. Supp. 3d 808, 813 n.6 (N.D.Ohio 2018).

Similarly, on August 16, 2024, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana held that Plaintiff’s claim for negligent hiring against a broker was: 1) preempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (“FAAAA”) found in 49 U.S.C. § 14501(c)(1), and 2) not saved by the “safety exception” found in 49 U.S.C. § 14501(c)(2)(A). See Bailey v. Progressive Cty. Mut. Ins. Co., No. 22-5161, 2024 WL 3845966 (E.D. La. Aug. 16, 2024).

In Bailey, the broker, Direct Connect Logistix, Inc. (“Direct Connect”), contracted with a motor carrier to transport a load and an accident occurred that resulted in injuries to Plaintiff. Direct Connect filed a motion to dismiss, arguing the claim was preempted by the FAAAA and not saved by the “safety exception.” The district court agreed with Direct Connect that the negligent hiring claim against it was preempted by the FAAAA and that the claim did not fall within the “safety exception” by primarily relying upon Aspen Am. Ins. Co. v. Landstar Ranger, Inc., 65 F.4th 1261, 1266 (11th Cir. 2023) and Ye v. GlobalTranz Enterprises, Inc., 74 F. 4th 453 (7th Cir. 2023).

We continue to recommend that freight brokers, and shippers, assert the FAAAA preemption defense early, file dispositive motions, and consider filing appeals where appropriate so that other state and federal appellate courts decide this issue, and the Supreme Court of the United States may be inclined to accept a writ of certiorari.