2019 IL App (2d) 180236
Ill. App. Ct.2019Background
- On March 14, 2014 a tractor-trailer driven by Isreal Vela (employee of E.G.G. Trucking) collided with Gina Brettman at an intersection after completing delivery of cucumbers to a Kraft/Claussen plant; Brettman suffered severe injuries.
- Texana grew/sold the cucumbers and used brokers to arrange transport; M&G Truck Brokerage brokered this shipment and selected E.G.G. to haul the load. E.G.G. owned the truck and employed Vela.
- M&G negotiated freight, collected payment from Texana, advanced $1,500 to E.G.G., required daily check calls and set temperature/deadline requirements (with fines for noncompliance), but did not own the cargo or the tractor-trailer and had no continuing operational control after delivery.
- Plaintiff sued for (I) vicarious liability and (II) negligent hiring against M&G, and (III) vicarious liability and (IV) negligent hiring against Texana. Plaintiff later abandoned count III; summary judgment was granted to M&G and Texana and this appeal followed.
- Plaintiff’s proofs relied on an expert (former DOT official) who criticized M&G’s carrier-selection practices (E.G.G. was “unrated” by FMCSA; drivers had prior citations and alleged falsified logs), and on depositions showing E.G.G. controlled postdelivery conduct.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether M&G can be vicariously liable (respondeat superior) for Vela’s postdelivery driving | M&G exercised sufficient control over carrier/driver (fines, required check-ins, delivery instructions) and agency continued through return leg | Any agency/control ended when E.G.G. completed delivery; M&G had no right to control driver postdelivery | Court: No agency at time of accident; summary judgment for M&G affirmed |
| Whether negligent hiring/retention liability attaches to M&G for hiring E.G.G. | M&G negligently hired an unrated, potentially unsafe carrier; that negligent selection caused injuries | Even if selection was negligent, injury occurred after contracted work was completed (posttermination), so no proximate cause | Court: Proximate-cause requirement not met for posttermination injury; summary judgment for M&G affirmed |
| Whether negligent hiring/retention liability attaches to Texana | Texana participated in hiring via family ties and should share liability | No evidence Texana hired/selecting E.G.G.; even if it did, injury was posttermination | Court: Plaintiff failed to show Texana hired E.G.G.; posttermination proximate-cause bar also applies; summary judgment for Texana affirmed |
| Whether plaintiff’s reliance on St. Paul (trip includes return leg) defeats termination argument | Trip/assignment may include return leg so agency/hiring continued | St. Paul interprets insurance-trip language and is inapplicable to agency/right-to-control analysis; contract/task completion ends authority | Court: St. Paul is inapposite; agency ends with completion of contracted task absent new contract; plaintiff’s St. Paul argument rejected |
Key Cases Cited
- Sperl v. C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc., 408 Ill. App. 3d 1051 (Ill. App. 2011) (broker’s operational control over carrier/driver can support agency/respondeat superior)
- St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Frankart, 69 Ill. 2d 209 (Ill. 1977) (definition of a ‘‘trip’’ in insurance context can include return leg; not dispositive on agency/control)
- Northern Illinois Emergency Physicians v. Landau, Omahana & Kopka, Ltd., 216 Ill. 2d 294 (Ill. 2005) (summary judgment standard; appellate review de novo)
- Gomien v. Wear-Ever Aluminum, Inc., 50 Ill. 2d 19 (Ill. 1971) (negligent hiring/retention liability relates to harm occurring in performance of contracted work)
- Platson v. NSM, America, Inc., 322 Ill. App. 3d 138 (Ill. App. 2001) (proximate cause in negligence cases typically for the jury but can be decided as a matter of law when facts cannot support it)