Broker Transparency and Liability: A Legal Retrospective

Conflicting U.S. court rulings are reshaping the debate over whether freight brokers can be held liable for carrier crashes, testing federal preemption and redefining safety oversight in the industry.

Broker Transparency and Liability: A Legal Retrospective

The debate over broker transparency continues to escalate as courts across the U.S. issue conflicting rulings on whether freight brokers can be held liable when a carrier they hire is involved in a crash. At the center of this debate is the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (FAAAA) and whether its preemption clause shields brokers from state negligence claims, or if the “safety exception” opens the door for liability.

C.H. Robinson Pushes Supreme Court to Affirm Broker Liability Shield Under Federal Law
C.H. Robinson urges Supreme Court to affirm federal preemption of state negligent selection claims, reinforcing protections for brokers under the F4A.

What Broker Transparency Means

Broker transparency involves the standards of diligence and accountability that freight brokers must meet in selecting carriers. The question before the courts is whether brokers should bear responsibility for negligent hiring or if federal law shields them from such claims. The answer carries implications for:

  • The level of safety oversight required in broker-carrier relationships.
  • Insurance exposure and liability risks for brokers.
  • The consistency of regulatory frameworks across state and federal levels.

Key Cases in Chronological Order

Summary Timeline

Case

Court

Outcome

Lee v. Werner

Ohio District Court

Claims preempted; safety exception not applicable

Cornejo v. Alliance Shippers

Illinois Appellate

Broker not liable; independent contractor relationship

Gauthier v. TQL

Eleventh Circuit

Broker shielded; cert denied

Cox v. TQL

Sixth Circuit

Broker may be liable; safety exception applies

Crane v. Liberty Lane

Fifth Circuit

Pending; potential to reshape split

Lee v. Werner Enterprises, Inc.

Court: U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio

Date: November 2022

The court found negligence claims against a broker were preempted by the FAAAA. Judge Knepp stated:

“Plaintiffs’ bodily injury tort claims … are preempted by the 1994 Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act … and not saved by the ‘safety exception.”

He later added, “The plain meaning of the words ‘safety regulatory authority of a State’ does not support the inclusion of private tort claims.”

Cornejo v. Alliance Shippers, Inc.

Court: Illinois First District Appellate Court

Date: September 2023

  • The appellate panel reversed an $18 million jury verdict against Alliance Shippers. The court explained:
“Alliance exercised little, if any control over Dakota’s and its drivers’ performance of the transportation work, as opposed to control over the result of the assigned task or matters ancillary to the work to be performed.”

It emphasized, “Alliance did not pay Dakota’s drivers and withhold taxes … hire, train or fire the drivers; dispatch or speak to the drivers; control the drivers’ routes or provide them with tools, equipment, or materials; or own the tractors or trailers the drivers used … Dakota … would perform services as an independent contractor.”

Gauthier v. Total Quality Logistics (TQL)

Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

Certiorari Denied: January 2025

  • The Eleventh Circuit ruled that the FAAAA preempts negligent hiring claims against brokers, and the Supreme Court declined to review the case.
  • The decision reinforced a line of rulings shielding brokers from liability in that circuit.
TQL Wins: Another Victory for 3PLs in Broker Liability Case
TQL secures win in 11th Circuit Court, reinforcing 3PL protections against liability in carrier accidents. Here’s why it matters.

Cox v. Total Quality Logistics (TQL)

Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

Date: July 2025

The Sixth Circuit reversed a lower court ruling in favor of TQL, holding that the safety exception could apply. The court noted:

“TQL disregarded public information, available via the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration website’s Safety Measurement System, indicating that Golden Transit was an unsafe motor carrier with a history of on-road safety violations and deficiencies.”

Attorney Bryan Nelson on the impact of the ruling:

“We now live in a world where the circuit courts are even (2–2), as the 6th Circuit has joined … in its ruling in Cox v. Total Quality Logistics.”
Sixth Circuit Reverses TQL Victory, Broker Liability Debate Escalates
Sixth Circuit ruling in Cox v. TQL deepens legal split on broker liability under F4A

Crane v. Liberty Lane

Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Status: Pending

  • The case involves a 2018 fatal crash linked to Penske Logistics.
  • Legal analysts suggest a ruling in favor of liability could tip the circuit split to 3–2, increasing the odds of Supreme Court review.
Another Broker Liability Case Lands in the Fifth Circuit; The Stakes Keep Rising
A Fifth Circuit case involving Penske could deepen the legal divide over broker liability, increasing pressure for a Supreme Court ruling under the F4A safety exemption.

Why Advocates Support Broker Liability

  • Public Safety: Brokers are positioned to vet carriers effectively. The Sixth Circuit noted that TQL ignored clear FMCSA data on Golden Transit’s safety record.
  • Accountability: Victims’ advocates argue that holding only carriers liable leaves gaps when unsafe carriers are hired despite warning signs.
  • Legal Support: As Bailey, Javins & Carter noted:
“The core of this claim is that the broker had a duty to act reasonably when selecting a motor carrier, and they breached that duty.”

Thus, from their perspective, brokers should be held liable. 

Why Opponents Resist Broker Liability

  • Federal Preemption: Courts like in Lee v. Werner stress that the FAAAA blocks state tort claims, preventing a patchwork of laws.
  • Broker Role: As Cornejo showed, brokers often do not control the “means and manner” of carrier operations, limiting grounds for vicarious liability.
  • Economic Risk: In Cox v. TQL, Judge Jeffrey Hopkins warned, citing from GlobalTranz’s bid to get the Supreme Court involved in this debate:
“By recognizing common-law negligence claims, courts would impose in the name of state law a new and clear duty of care on brokers, the breach of which would result in a monetary judgment.”
⚠️ The Most Important Court Case For Freight Brokers
“At issue is whether a broker be held liable for the negligence of a motor carrier.” - Matthew Leffler, the Armchair Attorney

What’s at Stake

  • Circuit Split: The score now stands at 2–2. The Fifth Circuit’s pending decision in Crane v. Liberty Lane could break the tie.
  • Industry Practices: Broker liability could force widespread adoption of stricter carrier vetting policies and increased insurance requirements.
  • Supreme Court Action: A widening circuit split may finally compel the Court to address the issue.
🎣 Broker Liability’s Turning Point
Plus, an update on Canadian rail stoppage, key economic insights for the current trucking climate, and why country star Luke Bryan may be singing the blues.

Broker transparency and liability remain unsettled issues. Courts are divided on whether the FAAAA shields brokers from state negligence claims or whether the safety exception creates accountability. With the circuit split now at 2–2, the Fifth Circuit’s forthcoming decision could set the stage for a Supreme Court ruling that reshapes broker liability across the freight industry.


Great! You’ve successfully signed up.

Welcome back! You've successfully signed in.

You've successfully subscribed to FreightCaviar.

Success! Check your email for magic link to sign-in.

Success! Your billing info has been updated.

Your billing was not updated.