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)

Download PDF
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

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?