Latest news with #TQL
Yahoo
10-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Another broker liability case knocks at Supreme Court door, this one involving C.H. Robinson
Even as the trucking legal community looks for the possibility of the Supreme Court being asked to review a court decision that put Total Quality Logistics on the losing side of the issue of broker liability, there is another federal case on the same subject that already is on the nine justices' formal requests for high court certiorari. Legal filings heated up this week in the case of Shawn Montgomery vs. Caribe Transport II, a carrier. 3PL giant C.H. Robinson (NASDAQ: CHRW), which hired Caribe Transport, also is a defendant. Montgomery was injured in December 2017 in an Illinois collision with a Caribe Transport truck. C.H. Robinson prevailed (separately from Caribe Transport) on two separate requests for summary judgement in late 2023 and early 2024, respectively, from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the lower court in early January. That led Montgomery to seek Supreme Court certiorari in a filing made last month. C.H. Robinson is backing Montgomery's request for a Supreme Court review, even though it was victorious against that plaintiff in the lower courts. C.H. Robinson's support of the certiorari request has similarities to that of TQL in the request for Supreme Court review by Katia Gauthier. She was the widow of a man killed in a collision with a truck hired by TQL. TQL was victorious in Gauthier in a lower court and on appeal on the issue of whether the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (F4A) would preempt a state tort action against the broker. Despite the win, TQL wanted the Supreme Court to weigh in on the broader issues of F4A interpretation, given that circuit courts' decisions on the provision of F4A known as the safety exemption were not consistent. Gauthier's request for certiorari was denied. The lower court's decision in Montgomery looked to guidance from the case of Ying Ye vs. GlobalTranz, also in the Seventh Circuit, where GlobalTranz successfully argued that F4A, signed into law in 1994, protected it from liability. Ye's husband had been killed by a truck hired by GlobalTranz. C.H. Robinson, with successful court decisions in hand, could have just taken a victory lap after the Montgomery case. But it is backing its litigation foe Montgomery by supporting his request for Supreme Court certiorari. Its amicus brief was filed this week supporting Montgomery's request. 'Now is the time for this Court to provide certainty to the industry by resolving the conflict between the circuits,' C.H. Robinson said in its filing. (The National Association of Manufacturers also filed an amicus brief in support of Montgomery's request for certiorari). If the Supreme Court decides to review F4A, the judges would not be asked to rule on the heart of the law: the requirement that states take no action that would impact a transportation 'price, route or service,' also known as the preemption clause. There are no conflicting circuit decisions on that part of the law. What it would be asked to tackle: the safety exemption. The safety exemption says the 'price, route or service' part of the law 'shall not restrict the safety regulatory authority of a State with respect to motor vehicles, the authority of a State to impose highway route controls or limitations based on the size or weight of the motor vehicle, or the authority of a State to regulate carriers with regard to minimum amounts of financial responsibility relating to insurance requirements and self-insurance authorization.' In other words, if bad safety-related stuff happens to a truck booked by a broker, it is possible the broker will found to have some degree of liability. But it isn't certain. On one side of the conflicting circuit decisions are precedents in the Seventh and Eleventh circuits that found a broker's liability in a disastrous outcome involving a truck it hired–Ye in the Seventh, and a case involving a stolen truck brokered by Landstar (NASDAQ: LSTR) in the Eleventh–was not undercut by the safety exemption. The plaintiff therefore could not recover damages. Add to that the decision in the Montgomery/C.H. Robinson case and the victory count for 3PLs due to the safety exemption is three. The Supreme Court already rejected certiorari in the Ying Ye case last year. The conflicts between the circuits have now become more stark following Cox vs. TQL joining Miller vs. Robinson as cases where the safety exception didn't protect a 3PL, and Montgomery vs. Caribe adding to the list of cases where it did. In Cox vs. TQL, handed down Tuesday by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, the second-biggest U.S. 3PL ended up on the losing side in a lawsuit brought by Robert Cox, whose wife Greta was killed in a crash with a truck hired by TQL. The second case where the safety exception didn't protect a 3PL is the Miller vs. C.H. Robinson case from 2019 in the Ninth Circuit, with the Supreme Court having already denied a C.H. Robinson certiorari request in 2022. Allen Miller was left a quadriplegic after being involved in a 2016 crash near Elko, Nevada with a truck from RT Service, which C.H. Robinson had hired to move a load from Sacramento to Salt Lake City for Costco. The C.H. Robinson amicus brief in the Montgomery case does not mention the Sixth Circuit or the Cox vs. TQL case. The amicus brief and the Cox decision were published within a day of each other. TQL has not commented on its plans after the Sixth Circuit appellate court in Cox found that TQL's action in hiring a potentially dangerous carrier was the type of behavior that F4A's safety exception targets: a transportation provider creating an unsafe situation and then being able to be sued without protection from federal law. But given that TQL sought Supreme Court certiorari in the Gauthier case even though it had won, it is not unreasonable to assume it would now, as the losing party, ask the high court to review the conflicting circuit court cases on just how much F4A protects brokers under the safety exception. The court, if it chooses to review the issue, could take the Montgomery certiorari request, or a presumed TQL request, or both. To add to the confusion, a recent decision in an Illinois state court involving Echo Global Logistics came down on the side of the plaintiff and against the broker. In the case of Kaipust vs. Echo Global, Judge Scott McKenna of the Appellate Court of Illinois for the First District rejected Echo's claim that the safety exception of F4A protected it against the actions of a carrier it hired. In the Echo case, the 3PL had hired Critical Supply Solutions to move a load. In September 2021, a company truck was involved in a Nebraska collision that killed Mark Kaipust and his child Taylor. Mark Kaipust's widow Jamie filed suit. 'We reject Echo's argument that interpreting the safety exception to protect state negligence claims against brokers would lead to the safety exception 'swallowing' the preemption clause itself,' McKenna wrote. The preemption clause is the foundation of F4A, restricting state action against that triumvirate of prices, routes and service. 'The preemption clause's application to attempted economic regulation of broker conduct unrelated to safety is left untouched by this ruling. Only when a plaintiff can establish that the broker's conduct implicated the state's safety regulatory authority will a claim survive preemption per the present ruling.' In its amicus brief, C.H. Robinson cited the Echo case as another reason why the Supreme Court should take up Montgomery's request for certiorari, even though it is a state action and not in the federal court system. 'The resulting uncertainty over which motor carriers can be hired—by brokers or for that matter any other entity, such as the owner of freight that contracts directly with motor carriers—has a direct, adverse effect on interstate commerce that needs to be resolved by this Court,' the 3PL wrote. In the case of Montgomery vs. Caribe and C.H. Robinson, the plaintiff sought to bring up the issue of vicarious liability, where C.H. Robinson's actions in its relationship with Caribe established a level of 'control' could be seen as establishing an agency relationship. That could have allowed greater liability for C.H. Robinson. But both the lower court and the Court of Appeals rejected that argument. Much of the appeals court decision in Montgomery reviews that question. And that is mostly because the three-judge unanimous panel quickly rejects Montgomery's argument that the precedents set in Ye about 'agency' should be overturned, as it was the Ye decision that was the basis for much of the court's ruling in Montgomery. Quoting an earlier case, the court said 'we do not take lightly suggestions to overrule circuit precedent.' Echo Global Logistics is involved in another case involving broker liability where it prevailed in federal district court for South Carolina in a case brought by Angela Fuelling, widow of James Fuelling who was killed in a 2022 crash on interstate 85. A carrier hired by Echo Global slammed into Fuelling's vehicle. Echo Global's request for summary judgment to be removed from that case, citing F4A, succeeded last year. Angela Fuelling appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit earlier this year, where the case resides. It is considered significant enough that the Transportation Intermediaries Association, the brokerage industry's main trade group, has filed an amicus brief in the case. More articles by John Kingston XPO rating cut by S&P, agency cites continuing weak freight market First legal steps taken, this time by WSTA, to untangle the legal knot of the Clean Truck Partnership Two positive votes on logistics at Moody's: GXO and C.H. Robinson The post Another broker liability case knocks at Supreme Court door, this one involving C.H. Robinson appeared first on FreightWaves.
The Irish Sun
30-06-2025
- Sport
- The Irish Sun
Ireland ace blasts ‘ridiculous' conditions Carla Ward's side were forced to play through against USA
ANNE PATTEN blasted the 'ridiculous' heat after Ireland lost 4-0 to the USA for the second time in three days. The hosts 2 Defender Patten trying her best to cool down during a water break 2 Carla Ward's side again lost 4-0 to world's number one ranked team But moments after the friendly defeat in Cincinnati, Patten admitted that the humid conditions played a huge factor. When asked her opinion of the heat inside the TQL stadium in Cincinnati, the 26-year-old Aston Villa defender told 'To play with only a two-day break, against players of that quality, in this temperature at this time of day, to be honest, it's a bit ridiculous. 'But I think you can't fault anyone's effort. But it was pretty hard, yeah. As soon as your heart rate goes up it doesn't come back down because of the heat. Read More On Irish Sport 'Your body is just trying to work hard to cool itself down and it can't do that because the sun is just beating down on you.' Both friendlies had been arranged to give Carla Ward's side experience against quality opposition ahead of the Nations League play-off against Belgium in October. And the five-time World Cup winners duly obliged by replicating From the off, the USA were merciless and Ward's young squad struggled to find any rhythm under sustained pressure. Most read in Football The visitors were on the back foot from the start as Emma Hayes's team sizzled in the heat with slick one-touch football. It was 1–0 after 11 minutes as a smooth one-two move tore through Ireland's compact defence. Emma Sears sprinted down the right flank and delivered a perfectly-weighted cross to the far post. Botafogo's manager Renato Paiva celebrates as his team beat PSG in the Club World Cup Lynn Biyendolo met it first time with a composed side-footed volley that screamed into the top corner. Despite the lopsided play, Abbie Larkin chipped in with flashes of quality, and Chloe Mustaki punched above her weight at left-back, defending with grit and tenacity. But it was all USA on the scoreboard and they doubled their lead just before the break. Just as Ireland seemed poised to head into the interval trailing by only one, fate struck again. Sears appeared to double the lead, only for Brosnan to produce a brilliant close-range save. But the rebound fell kindly for Izzy Rodriguez, who powered it home to make it 2-0 at half-time — a cruel echo of the Denver fixture. The second half kicked off with Ireland making three changes. Lucy Quinn, Hayley Nolan — who last played in the United States in April 2023 –— and Megan Connolly all joined the action. MOULTRIE TO COME Minutes later, a slick pass by 19-year-old Olivia Moultrie opened up space behind the defence. Rodriguez sent in a dangerous cross, but a loose volley gave Ireland a reprieve. By the 50th minute, Lynn Biyendolo ghosted in behind the defence, nearly catching Brosnan off her line — but the keeper recovered quickly and parried her firm effort to safety. Minutes later, another probing move saw Hayley Nolan caught out at the back, allowing Tara McKeown to surge into the box. Her cutback to Croix Bethune was decisively blocked. At 54 minutes, Sears unleashed a dipping strike that flew just over the bar — a near miss that briefly rekindled Ireland's hopes. A third goal soon followed as Sam Coffey initiated a slick move by threading a ball into the middle for Yazmeen Ryan. The pass looked overhit, but Sears kept it alive, finding Moultrie. Moultrie teed up Ryan, who slid home the third goal, putting the result beyond doubt. A further water break at 70 minutes offered Ireland some respite in the scorching Ohio heat. But the visitors still could not get hold of the ball. FINISHING TOUCH A perfectly-weighted lofted pass caught Ireland's flat defence off guard and Alyssa Thompson took charge — first with a sharp touch, then rifling a powerful low finish into the net to make it 4–0. Ward said: 'On 22 minutes we had players asking to come off, unfortunately, we couldn't make those changes, then at half-time, three enforced changes as players were physically fatigued and some unwell. 'In the second half players were almost begging to come off and we couldn't do anything about it. 'We can't do anything about the heat, but it is dangerously hot out there and with humidity at 94 per cent, I've never felt anything like it.'
USA Today
24-06-2025
- Climate
- USA Today
Extreme heat at the Club World Cup: Latest weather updates at tournament venues
The FIFA Club World Cup was supposed to be a bright light shining on the most popular sport in the world, giving Americans a chance to see the best footballers on Earth on American soil. Well, the bright light part has been true at least. Unfortunately, it's also a burning light. Though the Club World Cup has yet to reach the knockout stages, thunderstorms delayed several group stage matches last week, and now blistering heat is taking its toll on the tournament as well, with extreme temperatures causing major concerns for several clubs involved in the tournament. On Saturday, June 21, Borussia Dortmund manager Niko Kovac told the media that he was "sweating like (he'd) just come out of a sauna" following his team's victory on TQL Field in Cincinnati. The temperature reached 89.6 degrees Fahrenheit, or 32 degrees Celsius. It was so hot that Dortmund's subs weren't even on the field during the game. But it's not just TQL that's feeling the heat. The American Northeast in general has offered difficult conditions for many teams. The heat wave is supposed to ramp up throughout this week as well. Clearly, the weather concerns that many fans had at the start of the tournament are starting to come to fruition. Club World Cup games: Schedule, times, how to watch for June 23 Which venues are experiencing issues? According to CBS News, the heat wave is strongest in the American northeast with some states recording record-high temperatures. Areas in the mid-Atlantic like Maryland and Virginia are also under extreme heat warnings. Meanwhile, states in the Midwest like Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio are facing blazing heat as well. While other areas further south like Atlanta and Nashville are also suffering the affects of the heat wave, those cities are more used to temperatures in the 90s during the summer. Here are the Club World Cup stadiums affected most (with the forecast for Tuesday, June 24 according to The Weather Channel) The heat wave is expected to persist until the middle of next week in some areas, meaning the Round of 16 knockout matches will likely suffer from similar heat issues. Club World Cup: Has first sellout as Bayern Munich beats Boca Juniors in Miami Will these same problems occur when the U.S. hosts the World Cup? These heat issues have raised concerns for next year's big event as well. The United States will host the 2026 World Cup, with the first games kicking off on June 11. Similar heat issues would create a terrible atmosphere for arguably the world's biggest sporting event. The New York Times reports that it is highly likely similar heat waves occur when the World Cup begins. Given that there were already struggles with heat during the 2024 Copa America, officials are right to be concerned with how this will affect players and fans. It will only be heightened by the fact that most of the games are scheduled for afternoon start times. When do the knockout stages begin for the Club World Cup? The knockout stage begins on Saturday, June 28, with the winners of Group A and Group C taking on the runner-ups in Groups B and D, respectively. Round of 16 matchups will continue through Tuesday, July 1, which could be around the time that the heat starts dying down.
Yahoo
17-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Another circuit weighs broker liability, boosting odds of Supreme Court review
Another case involving the question of broker liability – one that brokerage giant TQL already won at the federal district court level – is awaiting a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit on the appeal from the family of a woman killed by a truck hired by TQL. The location of the case is significant. The original case, Cox vs. TQL, was decided in favor of TQL in June 2024 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. Ohio is in the 6th Circuit of the federal judiciary system. Oral arguments were heard in January. Attorneys who represent brokerage companies have been hoping the U.S. Supreme Court will take up the question of whether a broker is liable if a carrier hired by the 3PL gets into an accident or some other misfortune occurs, such as a theft. The scoreboard so far: Brokerages have prevailed in cases not just in lower courts but at the appellate level in the 7th and 11th circuits. But in the case of Miller vs. C.H. Robinson (NASDAQ: CHRW), a 9th Circuit court ruled against the brokerage in a complicated decision. With the split decisions among the circuits, there have been at least three attempts to get the Supreme Court to clarify the issue of broker liability, but it has swatted them all away so far in not granting certiorari. One of those cases also involved TQL. Its attempt to get Supreme Court review was unusual in that while it was the plaintiff that filed the request with the high court, TQL, which had won at the appellate level in the 11th Circuit, agreed with the plaintiff that the Supreme Court should take up the issue. Like many others in the brokerage sector, it sought to have Supreme Court clarification on the issues. But the request was denied in January. A decision by the 6th Circuit upholding the lower court ruling in favor of TQL would add slightly to the split, because the scorecard would have three circuits ruling in favor of the legal argument that federal law under the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (F4A) preempts broker liability in such cases, with the 9th Circuit decision in Miller vs. C.H. Robinson on the other side of the divide to a limited degree. But a 6th Circuit decision in favor of the plaintiff in the TQL case, the family of Greta Cox, killed in the 2019 crash, would create further divisions in the issue, which might pry open the door to Supreme Court review a little wider. At the recent Capital Ideas Conference of the Transportation Intermediaries Association, Marc Blubaugh, co-chair of the transportation practice at the Blubaugh law firm – and coincidentally located in Columbus, Ohio, in the 6th Circuit – raised the prospect of Cox vs. TQL helping a push for certiorari on the question of broker liability. 'The more circuit decisions that come out, the greater the likelihood that the court would resolve the split among the circuits,' Blubaugh said. 'It is one of the criteria that the court looks at in addition to whether it is an issue of critical importance to the Supreme Court.' In the Ohio case, according to court documents, Greta Cox was driving with her grandson Brian Ragland on May 8, 2019, when her car was struck from behind by a truck driven by Amarjit Singh Khaira, who was driving for a company called Golden Transit. That company had been hired by TQL to transport condiments from Kraft Heinz (NASDAQ: KHC) from Illinois to California. In the original complaint filed by the Cox estate in January 2019, attorneys make several claims. One is that TQL was a motor carrier and identified itself as such. It's not just a casual term in litigation questions over brokers and the F4A; decisions have been made in favor of 3PLs in which a court has determined a 3PL is not a motor carrier. If it were, it could be found liable under the so-called 'safety exception' of F4A, which has the potential to bring in a wider range of negligence and other claims against a carrier that otherwise might be blocked by F4A. The key provision of F4A, which dates back to 1994, is that a state cannot take regulatory action that impacts a 'price, route or service' of a motor carrier or other transportation method. But the safety exception says F4A does not 'restrict the safety regulatory authority of a State with respect to motor vehicles,' including such issues as cargo size, weight and insurance. It was the safety exception that led to an unfavorable decision for C.H. Robinson. The lawsuit also says Golden Transit was 'an unsafe, incompetent motor carrier with a history of publicly available red flags [and had] a history of safety violations.' The initial suit against Golden Transit and its drivers was settled out of court for an undisclosed amount. That left the litigation against TQL, which said action against it was preempted by F4A. Judge Jeffrey Hopkins agreed. Hopkins said of the Cox estate's claim that TQL was a motor carrier, which could have opened the door to the safety exception, that the charge was 'preempted because a common law negligence claim enforced against a broker is not a law that is with respect to motor vehicles.' On the question of liability and whether finding a broker can be liable or negligent under F4A, Hopkins turned to a court ruling in a case involving Ying Ye and GlobalTranz, in which the 3PL prevailed. The case was one of the decisions where the losing plaintiff sought Supreme Court review and didn't get it. 'The enforcement of such a claim and the accompanying imposition of liability would have a significant economic effect on broker services,' Hopkins wrote. He then cited, working from the GlobalTranz case: '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.' More articles by John Kingston Breaking from the FreightTech AI pack: Companies make their case at TIA meeting New Mack long-haul truck makes grand entrance in bid for market share ATBS says independent drivers earned a little more in '24 but drove more as well The post Another circuit weighs broker liability, boosting odds of Supreme Court review appeared first on FreightWaves.
