372 F. Supp. 3d 758
N.D. Iowa2019Background
- December 24, 2016 three-vehicle crash killed Sharon Rohlf; Ivan Milosevic (Sirius truck driver leased to Expediters) crossed center line and caused the collision. Plaintiffs are Gary, Nicholas and Ryan Rohlfs.
- Sirius owned the truck and leased it (with driver) to Expediters; Expediters had a broker-to-carrier agreement (BCA) with Forward Air, a licensed freight broker, to carry freight for Forward.
- Forward required carriers to have FMCSA authority, adequate insurance, non-Unsatisfactory safety rating, and to sign the BCA; Forward used Carrier411 to screen and monitor carriers.
- Expediters was a new entrant carrier (certificate issued Aug 2016), had limited operations and personnel, and leased the involved truck/driver from Sirius; some DOT inspections showed violations and out-of-service orders.
- Plaintiffs allege Forward negligently hired/selecting Expediters (independent contractor negligent-selection claim). Forward moved for summary judgment, arguing it exercised reasonable care and that plaintiffs’ claims are preempted by the FAAAA.
- Court denied summary judgment on negligent-hiring claim (triable issues about carrier competence and Forward’s investigation) and held FAAAA does not preempt the Rohlfs’ personal-injury negligence claim; other claims against Forward were dismissed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Forward negligently selected/hired Expediters (Restatement §411 negligent selection of independent contractor) | Forward should have discovered red flags (new entrant status, limited experience, driver vetting deficiencies, inspection history) and thus breached duty to hire competent carrier | Forward reasonably screened Expediters (FMCSA authority, insurance, non-Unsatisfactory rating, BCA warranties, Carrier411 monitoring) | Denied summary judgment: factual dispute exists on whether Expediters was competent and whether Forward’s investigation was reasonable; claim proceeds to trial |
| Whether the FAAAA preempts the state-law personal-injury negligence claim against Forward | Plaintiffs: personal-injury tort claims are not preempted because FAAAA targets economic regulation of prices/routes/services, not traditional state torts addressing safety | Forward: FAAAA preempts state laws "related to" motor carrier services and thus preempts this claim | Rejected: Court holds FAAAA does not preempt personal-injury claims like the Rohlfs’ negligence claim; summary judgment on preemption denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (summary judgment standard)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (genuine issue of material fact standard)
- Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (summary judgment evidence standard)
- Jones v. Schneider Nat., 797 N.W.2d 611 (Iowa Ct. App. 2011) (adopting Restatement §411 negligent-selection framework)
- Watson v. Air Methods Corp., 870 F.3d 812 (8th Cir. 2017) (FAAAA/ADA preemption analysis and distinction between safety/tort claims and economic regulation)
- Charas v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 160 F.3d 1259 (9th Cir. 1998) (personal-injury torts not preempted by ADA)
- Hodges v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 44 F.3d 334 (5th Cir. 1995) (ADA did not displace state tort claims)
- Bower v. Egyptair Airlines Co., 731 F.3d 85 (1st Cir. 2013) (insurance provisions and implication that personal-injury claims are not preempted)
- L.B. Foster Co. v. Hurnblad, 418 F.2d 727 (9th Cir. 1969) (older Ninth Circuit rule limiting duty to investigate to unusually dangerous shipments)