High Court Appeal Filed by TQL over a Broker Liability Decision
The ongoing debate regarding broker liability under the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA) safety exception is currently a hot topic in the legal world. This issue centers around the question of whether freight brokers can be held liable for negligent actions that lead to accidents, specifically those involving motor vehicles.
In the case of Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II LLC, the plaintiff sued a freight broker for negligent hiring after a fatal accident. The Seventh Circuit, along with other hospitality courts, ruled that the claim was preempted by the FAAAA, concluding that broker services are not directly tied to motor vehicles and thus outside the safety exception. However, this ruling contrasts with the Sixth and Ninth Circuits, which allow such claims to proceed under the safety exception.
A similar scenario unfolded in Cox v. Total Quality Logistics (TQL), where the Sixth Circuit held that negligent hiring claims against freight brokers fall within the FAAAA safety exception. The court ruled that such claims are not preempted because they substantively concern motor vehicle safety.
The Supreme Court has been petitioned to resolve this deepening circuit split but has so far declined to grant certiorari in previous related cases such as Gauthier v. TQL and others. The latest petitions, including for Montgomery and Cox, renew hope for a definitive ruling, but as of August 2025, the Court has not yet taken up the matter.
This leaves brokers subject to different legal exposures depending on geographic jurisdiction, complicating risk assessments. The current status of these cases is as follows:
| Case | Circuit Court Position | Status with Supreme Court | |---------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------| | Montgomery v. Caribe II | 7th Circuit: claims preempted, broker liability denied | Petition for certiorari filed; pending | | Cox v. TQL | 6th Circuit: negligent hiring claims allowed under safety exception | Decision issued 2025; petition filed for SCOTUS review |
In the TQL case, the Sixth Circuit overturned a lower court decision, finding that TQL was not fully protected from liability by the F4A. The question before the Supreme Court in the TQL case is whether a common-law negligence claim alleged against a freight broker, based on the broker's selection of a motor carrier to provide transportation of cargo, is preempted by the F4A.
The debate revolves around whether a broker is considered a motor carrier. TQL argues that the safety exception is only for motor vehicles, while others interpret it more broadly to include brokers. The Supreme Court's ruling on these cases could provide much-needed clarity and consistency in this area of law.
[1] Legal Newsline [2] Law360 [4] American Shipper
- In the world of finance and business, the legal implications of the ongoing dispute over broker liability under the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA) safety exception is significant, especially for freight brokers in the investing sector. This debate, centering on the possibility of holding brokers liable for accidents involving motor vehicles, has led to contradictory rulings between different circuits.
- The intersection of technology and sports is not the only arena where inconsistencies exist; the legal status of freight brokers, particularly in light of the FAAAA, is a subject of ongoing controversy. The ongoing appeal for the Supreme Court to intervene in cases such as Montgomery and Cox highlights the need for a unifying decision on whether a freight broker's responsibility falls under motor vehicle safety regulations, a question that remains unanswered as of August 2025, causing complications for brokers operating across multiple jurisdictions.
