C.H. Robinson’s loss at the Supreme Court could set it up for another loss at a Pennsylvania federal district court, but a motor carrier’s safety ratings could complicate things.
The landmark Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II case, or simply known as Montgomery, which reached the Supreme Court, was not the only pending broker liability case. Parties involved in several other similar cases were anxiously awaiting that decision.
Essentially, the Supreme Court’s decision gave plaintiffs the green light to sue brokers for negligently hiring unsafe motor carriers. Several brokers were holding out for the opposite, hoping to be taken off the hook in pending cases.
Echo Global Logistics was dismissed from a broker liability case by a South Carolina federal district court. That was challenged in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals before the Montgomery decision sent the case back to the district, where Echo Global must defend against negligent hiring claims.
Coyote Logistics experienced a similar courtroom whiplash. The broker was originally taken off the hook by a Florida state trial court, but was later roped back into the case by a state appellate court. Coyote petitioned to the state Supreme Court, but the U.S. Supreme Court decision rendered that attempt futile.
Now, C.H. Robinson, the broker defendant in the Montgomery case, is back in the defendant seat in a separate case.
In this case, a tow truck driver, Scott Reges, was severely injured while attending to a broken-down truck on the shoulder of Interstate 80 in Clarion County, Pa, last July. While working on the truck, another tractor-trailer driven by California resident Jugraj Singh and owned by Indianapolis-based Blue Horse Trucking struck both the disabled truck and Reges.
According to the lawsuit, Singh refused to show investigators his dash cam footage. The lawsuit also alleges Singh was in violations of hours of service and “utilizing his cellular device.”
A quick glance at Blue Horse Trucking’s Safety Measurement System history reveals a history of violations, including:
- 15 severe HOS violations
- 15 speeding violations
- Seven lane violations
- Two cellphone violations
Blue Horse Trucking’s Safety and Fitness Electronic Records, SAFER for short, data show a vehicle out-of-service rate just below the national average. However, its driver out-of-service rate is more than double the national average.
Reges’ attorneys argue that C.H. Robinson is aware of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s safety websites. Therefore, they should have known that Blue Horse Trucking was an unsafe carrier.
C.H. Robinson moved to pause the case while the Montgomery case was pending before the Supreme Court. That motion was denied in March. In the wake of the Supreme Court decision, the broker remains on the hook for the December trial date.
Surprise safety rating
Blue Horse Trucking’s safety rating throws a wrench in the gears.
In the aftermath of the Montgomery decision, C.H. Robinson changed its policies to exclude carriers with a Conditional FMCSA safety rating. Caribe Transport, the motor carrier at the center of the Supreme Court case, had a Conditional rating.
But according to SAFER, Blue Horse Trucking has a Satisfactory rating, with a rating date of June 2010 and a review date of June 2025.
While C.H. Robinson will also disqualify motor carriers that are identified as “high-risk using internal metrics,” Blue Horse Trucking’s safety rating calls into question publicly available data. That issue is being raised by the Transportation Intermediaries Association (TIA).
After the Montgomery decision, TIA petitioned FMCSA for a rulemaking to establish a federal safety standard for motor carriers. The association representing brokers wants FMCSA to create a “carrier selection safety standard that informs brokers and shippers whether or not the use of a given motor carrier is reasonable.”
FMCSA acknowledges that its safety data is not exactly binding. The SMS webpage states, “Readers should not draw conclusions about a carrier’s overall safety condition simply based on the data displayed in this system.”
TIA argues that motor carrier safety determination is the job of the federal government.
“In light of the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Montgomery v. Caribe, it is now clear that brokers and shippers continue to face an untenable burden in attempting to evaluate, develop, and apply disparate methodologies and standards (using potentially suspect data) in an effort to discern whether a federally-licensed motor carrier will nevertheless be deemed unsafe according to judges and juries in every state and federal jurisdiction across the country,” TIA states in its petition. “The determination of what motor carriers are safe to use properly rests with the federal government.” LL
Credit: Source link
