The U.S. Supreme Court has put firm dates on the calendar for Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, the broker-liability test case the trucking world has been waiting on. In a Nov. 13 order, the justices granted extra time and set Dec. 1, 2025, for the petitioner’s merits brief and joint appendix, with the respondents’ merits brief due Jan. 14, 2026. The order follows the Court’s Oct. 3 grant of review. These deadlines formally start the march toward a ruling that could reset negligence exposure for freight brokers nationwide.
The schedule mirrors a joint proposal filed last week by petitioner’s counsel, Paul D. Clement of Clement & Murphy, which also contemplates a Feb. 13, 2026 reply brief. With the Court accepting the requested briefing cadence, oral arguments would be set after the final round of briefs lands, keeping the case on track for decision before the term ends in late June. For brokers and their insurers, that puts a rough, reliable timeline around a question that has fractured courts and underwriting models for years.
Why it matters for trucking: until the Supreme Court speaks, broker liability turns on geography. Plaintiffs argue that state negligent-selection claims fall within the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act’s “safety” carveout; brokers counter that such suits improperly regulate a broker’s core “services” and are therefore preempted. The outcome will determine how aggressively brokers must vet carriers, how contracts and indemnities are written, and how insurers reserve against catastrophic-loss cases that name intermediaries alongside motor carriers.
What to do now: the new timetable gives operations and risk teams concrete waypoints. Expect a wave of amicus briefs from trade groups, shippers, insurers and safety advocates keyed to each merits filing. Brokers with open cases raising FAAAA preemption should ask counsel whether to seek stays pending decision; shippers may wish to audit broker agreements and certificates of insurance to ensure coverage and indemnity language fits either potential outcome. If the Court narrows preemption, “good enough” carrier vetting today may be tomorrow’s liability gap; if it broadens preemption, some state-law playbooks could become dead letters overnight.
The case traces back to a 2017 Illinois crash and arrives at the high court with high-profile counsel. Clement—former U.S. solicitor general—is listed as counsel of record for the petitioner on the Supreme Court docket, underscoring the stakes for the broader logistics sector.
FreightWaves first flagged that the Court had agreed to the petitioner’s timing request, outlining the same sequence the docket now reflects: petitioner’s brief by Dec. 1, respondents on Jan. 14, and a reply targeted for Feb. 13. With briefing now locked, the next visible milestone will be the Court assigning an argument date after the reply is filed.
Bottom line for the industry: Friday’s order doesn’t answer the preemption question—but it finally answers “when.” For brokers, shippers, and carriers planning budgets, renewals, and litigation strategy, those dates are the difference between guessing and preparing.
Sources: FreightWaves, Supreme Court of the United States, Yahoo News
This article was prepared exclusively for TruckStopInsider.com. Republishing is permitted only with proper credit and a link back to the original source.
