Jones v. Schneider National, Inc.
797 N.W.2d 611
Iowa Ct. App.2011Background
- Jones, an employee of Fehrle Trucking, was struck in a Fehrle yard by a Schneider National-industry truck on July 14, 2006.
- Schneider National contracted Fehrle Trucking as an independent contractor to provide trucking services since March 8, 2004.
- Fehrle Trucking represented its drivers as competent and licensed; Schneider conducted an independent review finding Fehrle legally qualified with a satisfactory rating.
- Jones filed a workers’ compensation claim against Fehrle Trucking; by October 2008 Fehrle paid over $336,000 in benefits to Jones.
- Jones sued Schneider National for negligent hiring of Fehrle Trucking; the district court granted summary judgment resolving that liability did not extend to the contractor’s employees.
- The district court implicitly adopted Restatement (Second) of Torts § 411 as the standard of care for negligent hiring.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 411 applies to negligent hiring of an independent contractor. | Jones argues § 411 applies to negligent hiring. | Schneider argues § 411 should be adopted for hiring standard but not extended beyond contractor to contractor’s employees. | Section 411 adopted as standard for hiring an independent contractor. |
| Whether § 411 includes protection for employees of the independent contractor. | Jones contends employees should be owed a duty of care. | Schneider contends § 411 does not extend to contractor employees. | § 411 does not protect the contractor's employees. |
| Whether there is a genuine issue of material fact that Schneider negligently hired Fehrle Trucking. | Jones asserts Fehrle was unfit (diabetes, hearing loss, unsafe driving record). | Schneider contends evidence shows Fehrle was legally qualified, with satisfactory FMCSA rating. | No genuine issue; Fehrle was not shown unfit at hiring. |
| If extended, was there evidence of incompetence or unfitness of Fehrle Trucking at hire? | Jones relies on alleged health and driving-record concerns. | Schneider notes FEHRLE’s rating and lack of proof of unfitness at hire. | Record evidence insufficient to show incompetence at hiring. |
Key Cases Cited
- Duggan v. Hallmark Pool Manufacturing Co., 398 N.W.2d 175 (Iowa 1986) (limits of adopting §411 for contractor selection)
- Greenwell v. Meredith Corp., 189 N.W.2d 901 (Iowa 1971) (recognition of Restatement influence on related issues)
- Clausen v. R.W. Gilbert Const. Co., Inc., 309 N.W.2d 462 (Iowa 1981) ( Restatement guidance on third-party duties)
- Downs v. A & H Const., Ltd., 481 N.W.2d 520 (Iowa 1992) (employer control of work area as a relevant factor)
- Privette v. Superior Court, 854 P.2d 721 (Cal. 1993) (workers’ compensation rationale for duty limitations)
- Fleck v. ANG Coal Gasification Co., 522 N.W.2d 445 (N.D. 1994) (Restatement §411 includes disclaimers about contractor employees)
- Zueck v. Oppenheimer Gateway Props., Inc., 809 S.W.2d 384 (Mo. 1991) ( Restatement §411 context and third-party duties)
- Heinz v. Heinz, 653 N.W.2d 334 (Iowa 2002) ( Restatement as guide, not strict law)
- Godar v. Edwards, 588 N.W.2d 701 (Iowa 1999) (limits on negligent hiring standards and evidence)