74 F.4th 453
7th Cir.2023Background
- GlobalTranz (freight broker) arranged transport through motor carrier Global Sunrise; in Nov. 2017 a Global Sunrise driver crashed into a motorcycle, killing Shawn Lin.
- Ye (surviving spouse) sued Global Sunrise (motor carrier) and later amended to sue GlobalTranz for negligent hiring and vicarious liability.
- Counsel for Global Sunrise withdrew; default judgment entered against Global Sunrise and $10M awarded to Ye (not challenged here).
- District court dismissed Ye’s negligent-hiring claim against GlobalTranz as preempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA), 49 U.S.C. § 14501(c)(1), and held the safety exception (§ 14501(c)(2)(A)) did not apply; summary judgment later entered for GlobalTranz on the vicarious-liability claim.
- Ye appealed only the dismissal of the negligent-hiring claim; the Seventh Circuit affirmed, holding the claim preempted and not saved by the safety exception.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Ye’s Illinois negligent-hiring claim is preempted by FAAAA § 14501(c)(1) | Ye: negligent-hiring is a traditional state tort (public duty) and not sufficiently "related to" broker rates/routes/services to be preempted | GlobalTranz: claim directly attacks broker’s service of selecting/hiring a carrier and thus has a significant economic effect on broker services and is preempted | Held: preempted — the claim has a direct connection to broker services and fits § 14501(c)(1)’s broad "related to" reach |
| Whether the FAAAA safety exception (§ 14501(c)(2)(A)) saves Ye’s negligent-hiring claim | Ye: state tort law falls within a State’s "safety regulatory authority," so the exception applies | GlobalTranz: the exception is limited to laws "with respect to motor vehicles" (direct vehicle-focused regulation); negligent-hiring of a broker is only indirectly related and thus excluded | Held: exception does not apply — the statute requires a direct link to motor vehicles and negligent-hiring claims against brokers are too attenuated |
Key Cases Cited
- Morales v. Trans World Airlines, 504 U.S. 374 (1992) (interprets "related to" broadly in transportation deregulation preemption)
- Rowe v. New Hampshire Motor Transp. Ass’n, 552 U.S. 364 (2008) (preemption can reach state laws with even indirect connection to regulated services, but not tenuous/peripheral ones)
- Dan’s City Used Cars, Inc. v. Pelkey, 569 U.S. 251 (2013) (limits on scope of exemptions in transportation preemption statutes)
- Ours Garage & Wrecker Serv., Inc. v. City of Columbus, 536 U.S. 424 (2002) (distinguishes preemption and safety-exception purposes)
- Northwest, Inc. v. Ginsberg, 572 U.S. 273 (2014) (state common-law torts fall within statutory language "law[s] ... having the force and effect of law")
- Nationwide Freight Sys., Inc. v. Illinois Com. Comm’n, 784 F.3d 367 (7th Cir. 2015) (two-part framework for assessing whether state law "relates to" broker rates/routes/services)
- Miller v. C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc., 976 F.3d 1016 (9th Cir. 2020) (held negligent-hiring preempted but read the safety exception more broadly)
- Aspen Am. Ins. Co. v. Landstar Ranger, Inc., 65 F.4th 1261 (11th Cir. 2023) (held negligent-hiring claims against brokers preempted and safety exception requires direct motor-vehicle link)