Suing Amazon.com for Delivery Van and Semi-Truck Accidents: The "Middle Mile" Liability Loophole

23 hours ago
20 min read

Click here to get FREE HELP finding an Amazon Truck Accident Lawyer Near You

Last Reviewed: May 5, 2026

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. If you have been injured in a crash with an Amazon vehicle, consult a licensed personal injury attorney about the specific facts of your case.

Suing Amazon.com for delivery van and semi-truck accidents requires identifying which Amazon program the driver was running under at the moment of impact: Flex, Delivery Service Partner, Amazon Freight Partner, or Amazon Relay. Each program is governed by a different liability framework, and the federally regulated "middle mile" Relay network creates the most contested loophole because Amazon operates there as a freight broker, invoking FAAAA preemption to shield itself from state negligence claims.

Key Facts at a Glance

In 2023, 4,354 people died in large truck crashes in the United States, with 65 percent of those deaths occurring among occupants of passenger vehicles, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
A six-year CBS News investigation of FMCSA data found that Amazon's trucking contractors had unsafe driving violation rates at least 89 percent higher than non-Amazon carriers in every month studied.
More than 11,000 carriers hauled freight for Amazon in 2024, and Amazon has disciplined approximately 19,000 motor carriers for failing FMCSA safety requirements since program inception.
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument on March 4, 2026 in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, a case that will decide whether the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act preempts state negligent-hiring claims against freight brokers, including Amazon Relay.
Amazon filed an amicus brief on January 21, 2026 supporting FAAAA preemption of state tort claims against brokers, signaling its direct stake in the loophole.
Under 49 CFR Part 387, motor carriers hauling general freight must carry a minimum of $750,000 in public liability coverage, with hazardous-materials carriers required to maintain $1,000,000 to $5,000,000.
An August 2024 Gwinnett County, Georgia jury apportioned 85 percent of fault to Amazon Logistics on a negligent-hiring theory, returning a $16.2 million verdict in a Delivery Service Partner crash, the first such verdict in Georgia.

When an Amazon-branded delivery van clips a pedestrian in a residential cul-de-sac, or an 80,000-pound tractor-trailer hauling Prime freight crosses the centerline on an interstate, injured victims and surviving family members face a defendant that is structurally engineered to disappear from the lawsuit. Amazon does not employ the driver. Amazon does not own the vehicle. Amazon, in many cases, does not even hold federal motor-carrier authority for the load. Yet Amazon controls the route, the timing, the safety scoring system, and the contract that triggered the trip.

That structural gap between operational control and legal accountability is the "middle mile" liability loophole. It is not a single statute or doctrine; it is a layered system of independent-contractor agreements, federal preemption defenses, and decentralized fleet ownership that Amazon has spent more than a decade building. The loophole has prevailed in some cases and collapsed in others, and as of May 2026, a U.S. Supreme Court decision is pending that will define its outer limits for the next generation of trucking litigation.

This article maps the loophole in detail. It explains the four Amazon driver-classification programs, how each one allocates liability differently, why the federally regulated middle mile is the hardest territory for plaintiffs, and what legal theories crash victims and their truck accident attorneys are using to break through the contractor shield. The goal is to give readers a complete and current understanding of where Amazon is reachable and where it is not, before they make decisions that affect the value of their case.

What is the "middle mile" in Amazon's delivery network?
How does Amazon's middle mile differ from last-mile delivery?
Why does Amazon's broker status create the "liability loophole"?
What is the FAAAA, and why does it shield Amazon from state tort claims?
How did Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II reach the Supreme Court?
What are the four Amazon driver classifications, and how does each affect liability?
What legal theories work for suing Amazon despite the loophole?
What does Amazon's safety record actually look like?
What damages can be recovered in an Amazon truck accident case?
What insurance layers apply after an Amazon truck crash?
What evidence must be preserved immediately?
What are the state-by-state filing deadlines for suing Amazon?
What should you do right after an Amazon truck crash?
Frequently asked questions
Authoritative references
Editorial standards and review

What Is the "Middle Mile" in Amazon's Delivery Network?

The middle mile is the segment of Amazon's logistics network that moves goods between Amazon facilities, not between Amazon and the customer. Tractor-trailers run from inbound ports and supplier locations to fulfillment centers, then between fulfillment centers and sort centers, and finally from sort centers to last-mile delivery stations.

These are interstate, long-haul, and regional commercial-trucking runs. The vehicles are full-weight Class 8 tractor-trailers with gross vehicle weight ratings up to 80,000 pounds. They are governed by the full Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration regulatory apparatus codified at 49 CFR Parts 390 through 397, including hours-of-service limits, electronic-logging-device requirements, drug and alcohol testing, equipment inspections, and minimum financial responsibility. According to Amazon's own published data, the company operates more than 70,000 trailers and 24,000 intermodal containers in this network.

The legal significance of the middle mile is that the heaviest vehicles in Amazon's chain operate there, the speeds are highway speeds, and the catastrophic-injury exposure for innocent passenger-vehicle occupants is at its peak. NHTSA 2023 data confirms that 70 percent of fatal large-truck crash deaths involved occupants of the smaller vehicle (IIHS Fatality Facts).

How Does Amazon's Middle Mile Differ From Last-Mile Delivery?

The middle mile and last mile differ in vehicle class, driver-classification program, regulatory framework, and the legal theories most likely to reach Amazon. The last mile uses Sprinter-style vans of 10,000 to 14,000 pounds operated by Delivery Service Partners on neighborhood routes. The middle mile uses semi-trucks operated by Amazon Freight Partners and independent Amazon Relay carriers on highway corridors.

The differences matter because the legal pathways are fundamentally different. Last-mile cases turn on the level of operational control Amazon exerts over DSPs through the Rabbit handheld device, route assignment, performance metrics, and AI-camera surveillance, supporting respondeat superior and negligent-hiring claims under traditional state tort law. Middle-mile cases involve federally licensed motor carriers operating under their own DOT authority, which is where the FAAAA broker-preemption defense becomes Amazon's strongest shield.

The table below summarizes the operational and legal contrast that drives the rest of the analysis in this article.

Why Does Amazon's Broker Status Create the "Liability Loophole"?

Amazon's broker status creates the loophole because federally licensed freight brokers do not own trucks, do not employ drivers, and do not directly transport goods, yet they design the load terms that make the trip happen. When Amazon Relay matches a Prime load to an independent motor carrier through its app, Amazon argues it is acting as a federally licensed broker arranging transportation, not as a carrier responsible for the conduct of the carrier's driver.

That framing matters because it places Amazon in the protected legal category created by Congress when it deregulated the trucking industry in the 1990s. Federal law at 49 U.S.C. § 14501(c) preempts state laws "related to a price, route, or service" of motor carriers, brokers, and freight forwarders. Amazon's argument is that a state-court negligent-hiring lawsuit against a broker for selecting an unsafe carrier is exactly the kind of state-law interference Congress intended to displace.

A WTSP investigative report found that, proportionally, Amazon used twice as many outside inspected carriers as Costco, Target, and Walmart combined in 2024. Drivers hauling reported Amazon cargo were six times more likely than competitors to be on the road with an unsafe driving score. The data illustrates why broker selection has become a central battleground in commercial trucking law: the broker's choice of carrier is, in many cases, the only meaningful safety check before a 40-ton vehicle enters the highway system.

What Is the FAAAA, and Why Does It Shield Amazon From State Tort Claims?

The Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 is the federal statute that, despite its aviation-focused title, governs the deregulated motor-carrier and freight-brokerage industries. Its preemption clause prohibits state regulation of broker pricing, routing, and services. Its safety-savings clause preserves state authority to regulate motor-vehicle safety. The unresolved legal question is whether a state-court negligent-hiring claim against a broker survives the preemption clause by fitting into the safety exception.

Federal circuit courts have split badly on the answer. The Seventh and Eleventh Circuits have held that negligent-selection claims against brokers are preempted and the safety exception does not save them, because broker conduct is not directly "with respect to motor vehicles" (Ye v. GlobalTranz Enterprises; Aspen American Ins. Co. v. Landstar Ranger). The Sixth and Ninth Circuits have held the opposite, that the safety exception preserves negligent-selection claims because they promote public safety (Cox v. Total Quality Logistics; Miller v. C.H. Robinson Worldwide).

Amazon Relay operates nationwide, so the practical result of the split is that the same accident produces different outcomes depending on the federal circuit where the lawsuit is filed. A crash victim in Atlanta loses against Amazon on FAAAA grounds; a crash victim in Cincinnati or San Francisco proceeds to discovery. That kind of arbitrage is exactly the situation the Supreme Court agreed to resolve.

How Did Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II Reach the Supreme Court?

Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, Docket No. 24-1238, originated from a 2017 Illinois highway accident in which Shawn Montgomery's stopped vehicle was struck on the shoulder by a tractor-trailer driven by Yosniel Varela-Mojena, an employee of motor carrier Caribe Transport II. The shipment had been arranged by C.H. Robinson Worldwide, the largest freight broker in North America. Montgomery sued the driver, the carrier, and the broker, alleging both vicarious liability and negligent hiring against C.H. Robinson.

The federal district court granted summary judgment for C.H. Robinson on vicarious liability, finding Caribe was an independent contractor, and later entered judgment for the broker on the negligent-hiring claim under Seventh Circuit precedent in Ye v. GlobalTranz, which held the FAAAA preempts such claims. The Seventh Circuit affirmed in January 2025. Both Montgomery and C.H. Robinson then petitioned for certiorari; Robinson sought review specifically to obtain nationwide clarity for the brokerage industry. The Supreme Court granted certiorari on October 3, 2025.

Oral argument was held on March 4, 2026. According to SCOTUSblog reporting, Amazon filed an amicus brief in support of C.H. Robinson on January 21, 2026, alongside the National Association of Manufacturers, Airlines for America, and the Washington Legal Foundation. The Truck Safety Coalition and a coalition of state attorneys general filed on the plaintiff's side. A decision is expected before the Court's summer recess in late June or early July 2026 (Cornell Legal Information Institute).

Whichever way the Court rules, the decision will reset the boundaries of broker liability nationwide. A ruling for preemption locks Amazon's middle-mile loophole in place; a ruling for the safety exception opens Relay carrier-selection decisions to state-court scrutiny. There is no middle outcome.

If you have been seriously injured in a crash with an Amazon-branded vehicle and the question of broker liability is in play, the choice of forum and the choice of legal theory matter immediately. Schedule a free case review before evidence preservation deadlines elapse.

What Are the Four Amazon Driver Classifications, and How Does Each Affect Liability?

Amazon operates four parallel driver-classification programs, each of which handles a different segment of the delivery chain and produces a different legal-liability profile. Identifying the program at the moment of impact is the threshold question in any Amazon truck accident case, because it determines which insurance policies respond, which legal theories work, and whether Amazon itself can be named as a defendant.

The first is Amazon Flex, an app-based gig program in which independent contractors use their personal vehicles to deliver packages on demand. The second is the Delivery Service Partner (DSP) program, in which small companies operate fleets of 20 to 40 Amazon-branded vans on last-mile routes, employing drivers directly. The third is the Amazon Freight Partner (AFP) program, founded in 2019, in which independent business owners run fleets of 20 to 45 Amazon-provided tractor-trailers on middle-mile routes with W2 driver-employees (Amazon Freight Partner FAQ). The fourth is Amazon Relay, a freight-brokerage platform that books loads to more than 11,000 independent FMCSA-licensed motor carriers (CBS News).

The table below sets out the liability framework for each program. Note that a commercial truck accident injury attorney's first job in any Amazon case is determining which row of this table applies, because the analysis that follows is dictated by it.

What Legal Theories Work for Suing Amazon Despite the Loophole?

Plaintiffs who recover against Amazon at trial generally do so under one of five recognized theories, each of which targets a different point of vulnerability in Amazon's contractor structure. The strength of the theory depends on the program at issue and the evidence available about Amazon's actual control over the trip.

Respondeat superior and vicarious liability through control. This is the theory that prevailed in the Gwinnett County, Georgia case where a jury apportioned 85 percent of fault to Amazon Logistics in a DSP crash, returning a $16.2 million verdict (Forsythe Law Firm). The argument is that Amazon's pervasive operational control over DSP drivers, including route assignment through the Rabbit device, real-time GPS monitoring, AI-camera surveillance for behaviors like yawning, and rigid delivery quotas, makes the driver Amazon's agent in substance regardless of contract labels.

Negligent hiring, selection, and retention. Where Amazon engages a carrier or DSP with a documented history of safety violations and continues to assign loads or routes, plaintiffs argue Amazon failed in its independent duty of care to the public. This is the theory the Supreme Court is now reviewing in the broker context. In the DSP context, it survives independently of FAAAA preemption because Amazon is not acting as a broker in the last mile.

Direct negligence. Plaintiffs argue Amazon's delivery quotas, time-tracking systems, and aggressive performance metrics directly cause unsafe driving by creating economic pressure to speed, skip breaks, and run yellow lights. This theory targets Amazon's own design choices rather than any vicarious imputation.

Negligent entrustment. When Amazon supplies the trailer, the routing software, the load specifications, and the safety-scoring framework, plaintiffs argue Amazon entrusted dangerous instrumentalities to operators it knew or should have known were unfit. A 2024 federal district court allowed Whaley v. Amazon.com to survive dismissal on agency and entrustment claims based on Amazon's Relay-platform control.

State dangerous-instrumentality doctrine. A handful of states impose strict vicarious liability on the owner of a vehicle for the conduct of a permissive user. Florida is the most prominent example, and Florida plaintiffs have used the doctrine where Amazon owns or leases the delivery van placed with a DSP (Swope Rodante).

The accountability gap is real, but it is not absolute. Recent rulings demonstrate that plaintiffs with the right facts and the right forum continue to break through. A November 2025 Nevada trial court denied Amazon summary judgment on Relay control questions and sent the case to a jury (Aguiar Injury Lawyers). By contrast, on February 27, 2025, the Delaware County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas held in Green v. Amazon that the FAAAA preempted both vicarious-liability and negligent-hiring claims against Amazon as a broker. Working with an experienced truck accident attorney early matters because the choice of forum, claim framing, and evidence preservation strategy shape the entire case.

What Does Amazon's Safety Record Actually Look Like?

The publicly available safety data on Amazon's contractor network is poor by every credible measure. The CBS News six-year analysis of FMCSA data, covering monthly unsafe-driving rates from approximately 2019 through 2024, found that Amazon contractors had violation rates at least 89 percent higher than non-Amazon carriers in every month studied (CBS News). In many months, the rate was double that of comparable carriers.

Over the two-year period CBS reviewed, at least 57 people died in more than four dozen crashes involving federally regulated carriers shipping for Amazon. A separate analysis cited by The Jewkes Firm puts the total fatal crashes involving Amazon-contracted trucking companies at 75 since 2015. Amazon's own internal program data, disclosed in interviews with its global legal director for road safety, reflects approximately 19,000 carriers disciplined for FMCSA safety failures since program inception, with permanent suspension as the most serious sanction.

Amazon's published response is that it sets stricter-than-federal safety thresholds on its Relay platform; the CSA BASIC score cap is 60 percent rather than the FMCSA's 65 percent (Amazon Relay safety guidance). New driver and vehicle violation-rate thresholds began phasing in for Relay carriers in late 2025 and February 2026 (Amazon Relay roadside-inspection violations blog). The company maintains that its standards are 5 percent stricter than federal floors.

The dispute, in litigation terms, is not whether Amazon is the largest single buyer of motor-carrier capacity in the United States; it is whether Amazon's published thresholds match what actually happens at the carrier level. A 2025 Florida lawsuit referenced in the WTSP investigation alleged that Amazon "does not conduct any safety investigation into motor carriers or truck drivers beyond verifying current operating authority, proof of insurance, and that the motor carrier does not have a safety rating of 'unsatisfactory.'" That allegation, if proven through discovery, materially undercuts the safety-thresholds defense.

What Damages Can Be Recovered in an Amazon Truck Accident Case?

Recoverable damages in commercial-truck cases are typically organized into three categories: economic, non-economic, and, in cases of egregious misconduct, punitive. Economic damages include past and future medical expenses, lost wages and lost earning capacity, vehicle repair or replacement, household services, and out-of-pocket costs. Non-economic damages include pain and suffering, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, scarring and disfigurement, and loss of consortium.

Punitive damages are available in the majority of states when the defendant's conduct rises beyond ordinary negligence to gross negligence, willful and wanton conduct, or fraud. In the trucking context, the most-cited bases for punitive claims are falsified hours-of-service logs, knowing assignment to a carrier with documented unsafe practices, and concealment of vehicle defects. Most states cap punitive damages either as a fixed dollar amount or as a multiplier of compensatory damages; for example, Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 41.008 limits exemplary damages to the greater of two times economic damages plus non-economic damages up to $750,000, or $200,000.

Catastrophic injuries are common in middle-mile crashes because of the kinetic-energy disparity between an 80,000-pound tractor-trailer and a 4,000-pound passenger vehicle. The injury patterns documented in NIH and PubMed trauma literature for these crashes include traumatic brain injury, spinal-cord injury with paralysis, pelvic and femur fractures requiring surgical hardware, internal-organ rupture, complex orthopedic damage, and burn injuries from post-collision fires. The medical-cost trajectory for these injuries routinely exceeds the FMCSA minimum $750,000 carrier policy, which is one of the central practical reasons reaching Amazon itself is so important to a full recovery.

What Insurance Layers Apply After an Amazon Truck Crash?

Amazon truck-accident claims typically trigger a stack of three to five insurance layers, and reaching the deeper layers usually requires litigation. The order in which the layers respond depends on the program at issue and the state's primary-coverage rules.

For a DSP last-mile crash, the first layer is the DSP's commercial auto policy, generally the $1 million minimum required by Amazon's contract. The second layer, in some states and under some Flex deployments, is Amazon's Flex commercial auto coverage. The third layer, available only when liability theories reach Amazon directly, is Amazon's corporate liability coverage. For a Relay middle-mile crash, the first layer is the motor carrier's 49 CFR Part 387-mandated public liability policy of $750,000 to $5 million, depending on cargo type. The second layer is Relay's $1 million general-liability and auto-liability minimums imposed contractually on participating carriers (Amazon Relay Insurance Requirements). The third layer, again, is Amazon itself if a successful negligent-broker theory survives FAAAA preemption.

The structural problem is that many Relay carriers are small and carry only the federal minimum, which is plainly inadequate for catastrophic injury. A spinal-cord injury with permanent paraplegia routinely produces lifetime medical costs alone exceeding $5 million. The deeper layer, Amazon's corporate coverage, is where the real recovery sits, and it is the layer Amazon has spent the most money defending against contractor-shield arguments and FAAAA preemption.

What Evidence Must Be Preserved Immediately?

The evidence that decides Amazon truck cases disappears on tight timelines, often within days of the crash. A litigation hold and preservation letter must go out within hours, not weeks. The most volatile data sources include:

Engine Control Module (ECM / "black box") data, which records speed, RPM, brake application, and throttle in the seconds before impact. Most ECM systems overwrite their buffer within approximately 30 days unless preserved by court order (Aguiar Injury Lawyers).
Electronic Logging Device (ELD) records, mandated under 49 CFR Part 395. ELD data shows hours-of-service compliance and is the keystone evidence for fatigue claims.
Dash-camera and inward-facing camera footage, including Amazon's own Driveri camera systems on DSP vans and many AFP tractors, which are typically retained on rolling 24-to-72-hour cycles.
The Relay app records, which include load tender, acceptance, route updates, and driver communications.
Mentor app safety scores for DSP drivers, which Amazon uses internally to evaluate route fitness.
DSP and AFP contracts with Amazon, including performance metrics, indemnification provisions, and termination history.
FMCSA inspection and crash records for the carrier, available publicly but compiled into a litigation exhibit.
Surveillance video from nearby commercial properties, which may be the only objective record of impact dynamics.

A March 2026 reference cited in attorney litigation analysis indicated that 94 percent of registered carriers do not undergo meaningful federal safety inspections in a given year (Aguiar Injury Lawyers). That gap is precisely why post-crash preservation is non-negotiable, because the contemporaneous data from the truck and the platform is often the only window into what actually happened.

What Are the State-by-State Filing Deadlines for Suing Amazon?

The statute of limitations for negligence lawsuits against Amazon is set by state law and runs from the date of the crash, not the date of discovery of injury extent. Negotiations with insurers do not pause the deadline. The table below shows the standard personal-injury statute of limitations for ten high-volume states; this is illustrative rather than exhaustive, and special rules apply in cases involving minors, government defendants, and wrongful death.

A missed deadline is the most common preventable case-killer in commercial-truck litigation. Filing requirements for wrongful-death claims, claims involving minor plaintiffs, and claims that implicate government defendants follow different timelines and are jurisdiction-specific. If the crash involved a fatality or a catastrophic injury, the time required to prepare and file a comprehensive complaint, including all proper Amazon-related defendants, can be substantial, which is why early consultation with experienced trucking-litigation counsel is critical.

What Should You Do Right After an Amazon Truck Crash?

The first 72 hours after a crash with an Amazon vehicle determine the upper limit of the case value, because that is the window in which the most volatile evidence either gets preserved or gets lost. The priorities, in order:

Get medical care immediately and maintain continuous treatment. Gaps in treatment are the single most-exploited weakness defense counsel uses to discount injury severity.
Photograph the scene, the vehicles, all visible damage, all visible Amazon branding, and the driver's documentation if accessible. Photograph the truck's DOT number and trailer markings.
Obtain the responding officer's incident report and identify all witnesses.
Do not give a recorded statement to any insurance company before consulting your own Amazon truck accident lawyer, including Amazon's insurer or the DSP's insurer.
Do not sign any release, medical authorization, or settlement document.
Engage counsel quickly so a litigation-hold letter can issue to Amazon, the DSP or carrier, and any third-party data custodians within days.
Preserve your own vehicle in its post-crash condition until inspected by a reconstruction expert.
Document every medical appointment, prescription, missed work shift, and out-of-pocket cost as it occurs.

The single most damaging thing an injured person can do after an Amazon truck crash is delay the litigation hold. Within 30 days, the ECM data is gone. Within 72 hours, much of the dash-cam footage is gone. The defense advantage compounds every hour preservation is not in place.

If you or a family member has been seriously injured in a crash with an Amazon-branded delivery van or semi-truck, contact a personal injury attorney experienced in Amazon contractor litigation immediately. Schedule a confidential, no-cost case review so the preservation steps can begin before evidence is lost.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I sue Amazon directly for a truck or van accident?

Yes, Amazon can be named as a defendant in a delivery van or semi-truck accident lawsuit, but the specific theory of liability depends on which Amazon program the driver was running under at the moment of the crash. For Delivery Service Partner last-mile crashes, plaintiffs use vicarious liability through control and negligent-hiring theories. For Amazon Relay middle-mile crashes, plaintiffs face the FAAAA broker-preemption defense and must rely on direct-negligence or carrier-control theories.

The single most important early step is identifying the program, the carrier, and the driver classification, because the rest of the legal strategy follows from that determination.

Is Amazon responsible for crashes caused by its contracted carriers?

Amazon may be responsible, depending on the level of operational control demonstrated, the program involved, and the law of the state where the crash occurred. Recent verdicts illustrate the range of outcomes: a Gwinnett County, Georgia jury apportioned 85 percent of fault to Amazon Logistics in a DSP crash and returned a $16.2 million verdict, while a Delaware County, Ohio court dismissed claims against Amazon as broker on FAAAA-preemption grounds in February 2025.

Detailed discovery into the contract terms, the platform-control evidence, and the carrier's safety history is the path to establishing or defeating Amazon's responsibility.

How is an Amazon freight truck crash different from a delivery van accident?

An Amazon freight-truck crash typically involves a Class 8 tractor-trailer running between fulfillment centers on highways at full FMCSA-regulated weights up to 80,000 pounds, while a delivery-van crash typically involves a Sprinter-class vehicle running last-mile residential routes at speeds under 35 mph. The injury severity is generally far greater in middle-mile crashes because of the vehicle weight and highway speeds, and the legal pathway to Amazon is far harder because Amazon operates as a federally licensed broker on Relay rather than as the de facto employer of DSP drivers.

What is Amazon Relay, and how does it create liability in a crash?

Amazon Relay is Amazon's freight-brokerage platform, on which more than 11,000 independent FMCSA-licensed motor carriers book Prime loads to haul between Amazon fulfillment centers. When a Relay carrier's driver causes a crash, primary liability rests with the driver and the carrier under traditional motor-carrier principles. Amazon's potential additional liability turns on whether Amazon's level of control over the load, the route, the trailer, and the carrier-selection process supports a state-law negligent-hiring or agency claim, and whether that claim survives FAAAA preemption.

Can Amazon be held responsible even if a contractor was driving?

Potentially, yes. The contractor-shield argument is the centerpiece of Amazon's defense, but it is not absolute. Pervasive operational control over a DSP driver, retention of a DSP with documented safety violations, dangerous-instrumentality doctrine in jurisdictions like Florida, and direct-negligence theories targeting Amazon's quotas and surveillance systems have all produced plaintiff verdicts. The Whaley v. Amazon.com 2024 federal-court ruling allowed agency and negligent-entrustment claims against Amazon to survive dismissal in the Relay context.

What evidence disappears fastest after an Amazon truck crash?

Engine Control Module data is typically overwritten within approximately 30 days; truck and nearby commercial dash-camera footage is generally retained on rolling 24-to-72-hour cycles; Amazon Relay app records, ELD logs, and DSP performance data are subject to retention policies that are not public. A litigation-hold letter must issue within hours of the crash to preserve all of these data sources, and any delay measurably reduces the recoverable evidence.

How long do I have to sue Amazon after a truck accident?

The statute of limitations is set by the state in which the crash occurred. Most states apply a personal-injury limitations period of 2 years; New York and Washington apply 3 years; Kentucky applies 1 year for motor-vehicle claims. Special rules govern wrongful-death claims, minor plaintiffs, and claims involving government defendants. Negotiations with insurers do not pause the statute of limitations, and missing the deadline ends the case regardless of injury severity.

What is the difference between Amazon Freight Partners and Amazon Relay?

Amazon Freight Partners (AFP) are independent business owners who operate dedicated fleets of 20 to 45 Amazon-provided tractor-trailers with W2 driver-employees, primarily on regional middle-mile routes; the program was founded in 2019 (Amazon Freight Partner FAQ). Amazon Relay is a freight-brokerage platform that books loads to thousands of independent FMCSA-licensed motor carriers running their own equipment. The legal-liability profile is meaningfully different because AFP partners use Amazon's branded trucks and operate as a quasi-franchised dedicated network, while Relay carriers run their own DOT authority and equipment under arms-length broker-carrier agreements.

What insurance covers an Amazon delivery van crash if the DSP's policy is not enough?

If the DSP's $1 million commercial auto policy is insufficient to cover the damages, the next available layers are Amazon's contingent or excess coverage applicable to DSP operations, and, if liability theories reach Amazon directly, Amazon's corporate liability coverage. Reaching the deeper layers requires litigation establishing Amazon's vicarious or direct responsibility, which is why catastrophic-injury cases are nearly always more valuable when developed beyond the DSP-only frame.

Why does Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II matter for Amazon Relay cases?

Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC will be the first U.S. Supreme Court ruling on whether the FAAAA preempts state-law negligent-hiring claims against freight brokers, including Amazon when it acts as a broker on Relay. Amazon filed an amicus brief on January 21, 2026 supporting preemption. A ruling for preemption strengthens Amazon's middle-mile shield nationally; a ruling that the safety exception preserves negligent-selection claims opens Amazon's Relay carrier-vetting decisions to state-court scrutiny. The decision is expected by late June or early July 2026.

If you are evaluating a potential Amazon Relay claim where preemption is at issue, reach out for a confidential review so the case can be positioned correctly before the Supreme Court rules.

Authoritative References

The following references support the statistics, statutes, and case citations used in this article. All URLs verified as of the publication date.

Editorial Standards & Review

This article was researched and written following PI Law News editorial guidelines for legal-content accuracy. All cited statutes, cases, regulations, and statistics were verified against primary sources or first-party regulatory publications at the time of publication. Court-case citations include docket numbers and court of decision; statute citations include the public code identifier. Statements of pending litigation reflect the procedural status as of the publication date and may be superseded by subsequent rulings. PI Law News articles are reviewed for accuracy, completeness, and compliance with the YMYL editorial standards described in the author bio. Last reviewed: May 5, 2026.

PI LAW NEWS

Legal Disclaimer