Since the May 2026 Supreme Court decision in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, four federal district courts have taken up the question of whether its safety exception applies to cargo theft claims, and they have all decided no.

Taken together, these decisions reflect a shared rationale that cargo theft amounts to “deception-induced deprivation of property” rather than a physical hazard on the road. Because none of the plaintiffs alleged that a carrier drove unsafely or endangered motorists, their claims fall outside the scope of the Montgomery safety exception. Several of the courts also emphasized a policy concern: permitting such claims would revive the very patchwork of state tort standards that the FAAAA was intended to eliminate through preemption.

Each of the court rulings carries meaningful practical weight determining that Montgomery does not stand in the way of brokers seeking early dismissal of cargo theft tort claims on FAAAA preemption grounds. This gives brokers a workable path to defend against such claims. Brokers facing such claims should move to dismiss, framing the plaintiff’s allegations as centered on fraud, theft, or other property-related misconduct, rather than on physical danger arising from motor vehicle operation on public roads.

To learn more about the decisions and what they collectively mean for brokers facing cargo loss claims, we encourage you to read the complete legal alert.