Case Summary

5025 Under Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations an agreement between a shipper and a driver may be characterized as an employer/employee relationship for purposes of federal law, thereby creating respondeat superior liability on the part of the shipper, but those regulations do not mean that as a matter of law the relationship is an employer/employee relationship under state law; this issue becomes important when the suit is by the driver against the shipper and the shipper is claiming is claiming that since the driver is an employee, workers’ compensation is the exclusive remedy; instead the status is a question of fact to be determined at trial rather than on motion for summary judgment.

AMERICAN PROPANE v LANDSTAR RANGER (Motor Carrier Duty) 184 CA4 981 [See 49 USC §14102(a)(4); 49 CFR §§ 376.12, 390.3, 390.11, 391.13, 392.9, 393.104(d), 393.106(c); Gulf Ins v TIG Ins, 86 CA4 422; Perry v Harco National Ins Co, 129 F3 1072 (9th Cir)]