Brantley v. UPS Ground Freight Inc et al

Filing 57

ORDER denying 38 and 41 Motions to dismiss. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 7/7/2017. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION
KIMBERLEY D. BRANTLEY,
Administratrix of the Estate of
Benjamin Brantley, deceased

v.

PLAINTIFF

No. 3:16-cv-352-DPM

UPS GROUND FREIGHT INC.;
OPTIMUM STAFFING INC., dfb/a
Optimum Logistic Solutions; ROBERT L.
WOODALL; and JOHN DOES, 1-6

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
UPS and Optimum are right that Elrod bars some direct negligence
claims when respondeat superior has been admitted.

Elrod v. G & R

Construction Company, 275 Ark. 151, 153-56, 628 S.W.2d 17, 18-19 (1982). But
Brantley alleges many particulars about both UPS' s and Optimum's
negligence connected with their policies and procedures. For example, she
alleges they failed to monitor bad weather conditions and failed to train
Woodall about the duties imposed by the FMCSA. Ng 22 at 15-21. Her
detailed allegations avoid the Elrod rule at this early point. McLane v. Rich

Transport, Inc., No. 2:11-cv-101-KGB (E.D. Ark. 9 August 2012); Regions Bank
v. White, No. 4:06-cv-1475-JLH (E.D. Ark. 24 September 2009). The motions
to dismiss, NQ 38 & 41, are denied.

So Ordered.

fr.

D.P. Marshall
United States District Judge

zM

-2-

2017