Texas Supreme Court Limits Shipper Liability in Trucking Crash Case

(The views expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of FreightWaves or its affiliates.) On May 15, 2026, the Texas Supreme Court issued an important decision in In re Home DepotU. S. A. , Inc.

The court ruled that Home Depot cannot be held liable for a fatal motorcycle crashinvolving a Werner Enterprises tractor-trailer that was hauling Home Depot’s freight. The courtordered the claims against Home Depot to be dismissed. What HappenedA young man died when his motorcycle collided with a Werner tractor-trailer. The driverallegedly ran a red light.

At the time, Werner was transporting ordinary goods for Home Depotunder a routine shipping contract. The victim’s family sued Werner, the driver, and Home Depot. They claimed Home Depot was negligent for choosing to do business with Werner, a largefederally regulated carrier with a history of safety violations and crashes.

Home Depot filed amotion to dismiss the claims early in the case, arguing it owed no legal duty to the public. Whenthe trial court denied the motion, Home Depot sought emergency relief from the Texas SupremeCourt. Why the Court Dismissed the ClaimsWriting for the court, Justice John P.

Devine explained that Texas law does not impose a duty ofcare on a “passive shipper” like Home Depot in this situation. Home Depot did not own orcontrol the truck, employ or supervise the driver, or create any special hazard with its cargo. Theshipment involved routine freight moved by an independent, federally regulated motor carrier.

The court relied on two basic rules of Texas law: One party generally has no duty to control theconduct of another, and a company that hires an independent contractor is not usually liable forthe contractor’s negligence. Simply hiring a trucking company to haul normal goods does not create liability for accidentscaused by the carrier’s driver.

The court noted that federal safety regulations already governcarriers like Werner, and shippers should not be required to duplicate that oversight for everyroutine shipment. Distinguishing Other CasesThe opinion made clear that this ruling does not apply when a shipper’s own actions create adanger. For example, in United Rentals North America, Inc. v.

Evans, the shipper loadedoversized equipment improperly and failed to correct the mistake, which led to an accident. Inthat case, the shipper’s direct conduct created the risk. No such facts existed in the Home Depotcase. Context: Broker Liability and the Montgomery CaseThis decision comes one day after the U. S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Montgomery v.

CaribeTransport II on May 14, 2026. In Montgomery, the Court held that freight brokers can face state-law negligent selection claims when they arrange transportation with unsafe carriers. The FederalAviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA) does not preempt these safety-relatedlawsuits against brokers.

The two rulings draw an important line: In Texas, direct shippers (like Home Depot) usingroutine shipments generally do not owe a broad duty to the public for a carrier’s negligence. Freight brokers, however, now face greater exposure nationwide after Montgomery.

What This Means for the IndustryFor shippers in Texas, the decision provides welcome clarity and protection. Companies that hirefederally licensed carriers for ordinary freight shipments are less likely to face “negligent hiring”lawsuits based only on the carrier’s safety record.

Brokers, on the other hand, should review andstrengthen their carrier vetting programs. Plaintiffs’ attorneys are expected to test the limits ofthe Montgomery decision in courts across the country. Bottom LineThe Texas Supreme Court’s decision helps prevent ordinary shipping contracts from turning intoopen-ended tort liability.

It keeps the focus of liability on the parties who actually control thetrucks and the roads. Together with the Montgomery ruling, these cases bring greater clarity to anarea of law that has created uncertainty and costly litigation for the freight industry. But thereremains considerable ambiguity into carrier vetting.

Should be expect 50 different standards ofcare for each state in the union? And if so, is that really what we want? The post Texas Supreme Court Limits Shipper Liability in Trucking Crash Case appeared first on FreightWaves.