Made with FlowPaper - Flipbook Maker
JULY / AUGUST 2026 FURTHERING THE HIGHEST STANDARDS OF CLAIMS AND LITIGATION MANAGEMENT A Claim Handler’s Guide to the Supreme Court Outside Capital Is Moving In Strengthening ADR With AI PIECING THE PUZZLE TOGETHER Litigation Management CLM’s First Task Force Report Outlines Progress and Wins JULY / AUGUST 2026 DIGITAL EDITION SPONSORED BY:CUSTARD.COM 888.CUSTARD Offering Smart Solutions for Towing & Storage Disputes, Risk-Free. Teresa Allen- Tignor VP, National Transportation Account Manager tallen-tignor@custard.com Why Custard? Comprehensive Invoice Audits – We catch duplicate, non-compliant, and excessive charges using standard industry practices. Good-Faith Negotiations – Our specialized team settles directly with towing and storage providers to reduce unnecessary costs. Stop the Storage Clock – We offer invoice advancement and release support to drastically mitigate storage accrual.JULY / AUGUST 2026 FURTHERING THE HIGHEST STANDARDS OF CLAIMS AND LITIGATION MANAGEMENT A Claim Handler’s Guide to the Supreme Court Outside Capital Is Moving In Strengthening ADR With AI PIECING THE PUZZLE TOGETHER Litigation Management CLM’s First Task Force Report Outlines Progress and Winsmcconsultants.com SERVING CLIENTS NATIONWIDE THOUSANDS OF SATISFIED CLIENTS 200 + FORENSIC EXPERTS 200 + AREAS OF EXPERTISE 2,000 + EXPERT TESTIMONIES 10,000 + COSTS OF REPAIR 800.729.0355 35 GL & CD FORENSIC SERVICES ONE COMPANY FOR ALL YOUR CONSULTING NEEDSTHECLM.ORG/MAGAZINE CLM MAGAZINE 3 CLM MAGAZINE JULY / AUGUST 2026 >>>CONTENTS 16 PIECING THE LITIGATION MANAGEMENT PUZZLE TOGETHER CLM’s First Task Force Report Outlines Progress and Wins 20 A CLAIM HANDLER’S GUIDE TO THE SUPREME COURT Breaking Down Key Decisions in the 2025-2026 Term 24 OUTSIDE CAPITAL IS MOVING IN In Construction and Beyond, Investors Are Looking at the Claims Process 32 MEMBERSHIP NEWS Membership on the Move 33 EVENTS Upcoming Events and Chapter Activities 34 VOICES Getting to Know Matthew Cianflone, General Counsel, Gold Medal Bakery FEATURES 4 FRONT DESK Rising to the Challenge 6 LOSING THE SHIELD What Insurance Defense Counsel and Claims Professionals Need to Know After Montgomery 10 ADDRESSING THE BLIND SPOT The Claims Payment Problem That Is Nobody’s Problem 12 STRENGTHENING ADR WITH AI How to Leverage AI Tools While Retaining the Human Touch COLUMNS 16 24 20 6 34 33 10 12 AROUND THE CLM 32 JULY / AUGUST 2026 DIGITAL EDITION SPONSORED BY:4 CLM MAGAZINE JULY / AUGUST 2026 DIRECTOR OF CONTENT Phil Gusman ASSOCIATE EDITOR Angela Sabarese ASSISTANT EDITOR Fran Clark ART DIRECTOR/ PUBLISHING OPERATIONS MANAGER Jason T. Williams EDITORIAL QUESTIONS Phil Gusman phil.gusman@TheCLM.org PRESIDENT Susan Wisbey-Smith VP PARTNERSHIPS Jeremy Campbell SENIOR ACCOUNT EXECUTIVE Laurel Metz ACCOUNT EXECUTIVE Megan Josd ADVERTISING QUESTIONS Jeremy Campbell jeremy.campbell@TheCLM.org 513-377-7228 JULY / AUGUST • ISSUE 4 • VOL. 10 REPRINTS For reprints and licensing please contact Jeremy Campbell at jeremy.campbell@TheCLM.org or 513-377-7228. CLM Magazine is published bi-monthly and covers news and topics of interest to insurance claims, risk, and litigation management professionals. Copyright © 2026 by the CLM. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission of the CLM. The views expressed in the articles are solely those of the authors or those interviewed and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of CLM or the companies in which the authors are employed. FRONT DESK >>> When CLM formed the Litigation Management Task Force, we aimed high and set out to help the industry solve its most persistent challenges by bringing key players to the table and holding tough, honest discussions. For most organizations, an undertaking like this would have been impossible. CLM, though, has a critical resource that other organizations do not: our unique membership that includes not only the sharpest minds in claims and litigation management, but also the most collaborative professionals in the industry. If there were solutions to be found, this group would find them. As the Task Force releases its first report outlining the progress we have made, you will read in this issue about the solutions that have already been put into action in crucial areas such as professional development. You will also read about constructive conversations the Task Force has held, and innovative ideas that have been generated, on challenges that may have seemed like third rails in the recent past. Our progress has been impressive, and it is all thanks to the time, energy, and ideas that Litigation Management Task Force members have contributed. To be clear, much work remains to be done. Starting honest conversations on a pain point like the billable hour, and discussing potential solutions, is a great first step, but the mission is far from accomplished. What happens next will be the true measure of success. What I know is that CLM has brought together the right people at the right time to take those next steps constructively, as shown by the Task Force’s accomplishments up to this point. The work done so far and the wins we will no doubt achieve in the year to come show the value of law firms and carriers working together to confront the industry’s most significant challenges. I am grateful for the commitment of the CLM Community, and I look forward to continuing the momentum and conversations the Task Force has achieved. Susan Wisbey-Smith President, CLM wisbey-smith@theinstitutes.org Rising to the ChallengeKEY SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITIES AVAILABLE NOW: Sponsorship@TheCLM.org ALL OTHER QUESTIONS: Help@TheCLM.org REGISTRATION NOW OPEN CONFERENCE CONSTRUCTION SEPTEMBER 23-25 • DALLAS BUILD THIS INTO YOUR 2026 CALENDAR6 CLM MAGAZINE JULY / AUGUST 2026 T he United States Supreme Court’s recent unanimous decision in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC is one of the most consequential for the logistics and transportation industry. The Court held that state- law negligent hiring claims against freight brokers are not preempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (FAAAA), creating potential liability pitfalls for freight brokers, motor carriers, insurers, and attorneys. While the ruling does not automatically impose liability on freight brokers, it removes a powerful, and previously successful, preemption defense that brokers used to obtain early dismissals of negligence claims involving trucking accidents. With this defense impacted, brokers could find themselves as defendants in trucking accident cases and their carrier-selection practices will be discoverable and scrutinized. THE BACKGROUND The case stems from an Illinois trucking accident involving a motor carrier selected by freight broker C.H. Robinson. The plaintiff alleged that the broker negligently hired Caribe Transport despite warning signs in the carrier’s safety record, including a conditional safety rating and documented compliance deficiencies. The plaintiff argued that the broker knew, or should have known, that selecting the carrier created an unreasonable risk of harm to the public. The broker argued that the claim was barred by the FAAAA, which broadly preempts state laws “related to” a broker’s prices, routes, or services. Lower courts agreed and dismissed the claim. The Supreme Court reversed. The Court concluded that even if negligent hiring claims would otherwise fall within the FAAAA’s preemption provision, they are preserved by the statute’s “safety exception,” which states that federal law shall not restrict a state’s safety regulatory authority “with respect to motor vehicles.” According to the Court, a negligent hiring claim against a broker concerns motor vehicle safety because it directly relates to the selection of the trucks and carriers operating on public highways. In doing so, the Court established a nationwide rule permitting negligent hiring claims against freight brokers. Losing the Shield What Insurance Defense Counsel and Claims Professionals Need to Know After Montgomery By John Anello TRANSPORTATION >>> John Anello is a partner at Callahan & Fusco, LLC. janello@callahanfusco.com THECLM.ORG/MAGAZINE CLM MAGAZINE 7 WHY THE DECISION MATTERS The immediate consequence of Montgomery is that freight brokers may no longer be able to secure early dismissals (depending on the facts) based on FAAAA preemption from lawsuits involving trucking accidents. Brokers face significant exposure to liability in cases involving severe injuries, fatalities, or significant property damage. Plaintiffs will pursue extensive discovery concerning carrier vetting, onboarding procedures, FMCSA data reviews, prior crashes, safety ratings, out-of- service rates, insurance verification, and compliance histories. Producing this information could present significant litigation costs and risks to freight brokers. IMPLICATIONS FOR CLAIMS HANDLING For claims professionals, Montgomery expands the range of entities whose conduct must be evaluated following a trucking loss. Initial claims investigations rightly focus primarily on the driver and motor carrier. Going forward, claims handlers should also assess the broker’s role in selecting the carrier and determine what information was available at the time the transportation assignment was made with a particular focus on: • FMCSA safety ratings and safety scores available when the load was tendered • Prior crash history and out-of-service violations • Carrier operating authority and regulatory compliance • Documentation of carrier onboarding and approval processes • Insurance verification procedures • Internal broker communications regarding carrier selection Brokers must make every effort to preserve and catalog these materials as plaintiffs will argue deficiencies in carrier vetting demonstrate negligence independent of the driver’s conduct. UNDERWRITING AND COVERAGE CONSIDERATIONS Montgomery also has significant implications for underwriting and risk management. Insurers have factored federal preemption into their evaluation of freight broker exposure. Montgomery changes that calculus as freight brokers now face prolonged litigation and significant exposure in accident cases. Insurers should reevaluate: • Broker liability underwriting criteria • Carrier-selection requirements • Risk-transfer provisions and indemnification agreements • Additional insured structures • Transportation professional liability products • Exposure to nuclear verdicts arising from catastrophic trucking accidents A SIGNIFICANT DECISION—BUT NOT UNLIMITED LIABILITY Importantly, the Supreme Court was careful to limit the scope of its holding. In a concurring opinion, Justice Kavanaugh emphasized that “the Court’s decision today should not be read to mean that brokers will routinely be subject to state tort liability in the wake of truck accidents.” Whether a broker acted negligently remains a fact- specific inquiry subject to the applicable negligence standard. Brokers that maintain robust carrier- selection procedures, review available safety information, verify operating authority and insurance, and document their decision-making processes may still be well-positioned to obtain dismissal through summary judgment or prevail at trial. The existence of an accident alone does not establish that the broker acted unreasonably when selecting the carrier. Notably, the Court did not address the vicarious liability theory advanced by the plaintiff in the underlying action. Plaintiffs can still seek to hold brokers responsible for the negligence of a carrier or driver based on the nature and extent of the broker’s control over the carrier. In many cases, the strongest defense may no longer be preemption, but rather a well-documented record demonstrating that the broker exercised reasonable care under the circumstances. LOOKING AHEAD Montgomery represents a major shift in transportation litigation. Freight brokers may now be within the scope of potential liability in serious trucking cases, and their carrier-selection decisions will receive unprecedented scrutiny. For defense attorneys, the decision creates new challenges. Litigation will increasingly focus on operational practices, safety reviews, and broker due diligence rather than threshold preemption arguments. For claims professionals and underwriters, carrier- selection protocols and documentation practices will become essential tools for evaluating and managing risk. While the Supreme Court did not open the floodgates to automatic broker liability, it did expose brokers to certain risks in all jurisdictions. In the post-Montgomery landscape, the quality of a broker’s decisions—and the documentation supporting them—may determine whether a case is resolved through dispositive motion practice or proceeds before a jury. K While the ruling does not automatically impose liability on freight brokers, it removes a powerful, and previously successful, preemption defense.Next >