New Mexico District Court Holds That FAAAA Preempts Plaintiffs’ State Law Tort Claims Against a Broker

On September 27, 2024, the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico held that a plaintiff’s state law tort claims against a broker were 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) (stating that preemption “shall not restrict the safety regulatory authority of a State with respect to motor vehicles . . .”). See, Steven Chasar v. Dubai Express Haul, LLC, et al., No. 1:23-cv-00964-JB-KK (D.N.M. Sep. 27, 2024).

In Chasar, the Plaintiff asserted state law tort claims against a broker, Bedrock Logistics, LLC (“Bedrock”), including claims of general negligence, negligence per se, and negligent hiring and selection of a motor carrier. Bedrock filed a Motion to Dismiss based on FAAAA preemption. After oral arguments on the motion, the district court concluded that the FAAAA expressly preempts Plaintiff’s state tort law claims against brokers like Bedrock.

The court explained its rationale during oral arguments on Bedrock’s motion. The court noted that the Supreme Court of the United States has broadly interpreted the words “related to” in the FAAAA’s preemption clause. And unlike the broad language used in the preemption clause, the FAAAA’s safety exception narrowly applies to a state’s “regulatory” authority, which does not include common-law tort claims. In other words, a broad interpretation of the FAAAA’s safety exception would effectively swallow the preemption clause. Because of this, the court held that the Plaintiff’s state tort law claims do not fall within the “safety exception” and those claims against Bedrock are dismissed.

We continue to recommend that freight brokers 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.