Automated Summary
Key Facts
On July 12, 2024, Laurencio Elier, an employee of AGP Transport LLC, negligently operated an 18-wheeler at high speed on a wet roadway in Orleans Parish, causing a collision with Plaintiff Rodney Colletti's vehicle. Plaintiff filed a damages petition in Civil District Court on July 11, 2025, alleging AGP negligently hired, failed to properly train or supervise Elier, and failed to ensure the truck was properly equipped. AGP filed a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss on January 5, 2025, arguing Plaintiff pleaded only threadbare allegations. The Court denied the motion on March 17, 2026, finding Plaintiff stated a plausible negligence claim by alleging AGP breached its duty to qualify, train, and supervise Elier, which caused the accident.
Issues
- The court considers whether Plaintiff must allege facts concerning AGP's knowledge of Elier's background or training protocols. Since this information is exclusively in AGP's control, the Fifth Circuit has held it is not the plaintiff's responsibility to provide non-accessible information in the complaint. The court notes that requiring plaintiffs to plead facts to which they do not have access would preclude claims of negligent hiring, supervision, and training against trucking companies.
- The court must determine whether Plaintiff Rodney Colletti has adequately alleged facts showing that Defendant AGP Transport, LLC owed him a duty of care, breached that duty, and that the breach caused his injuries. The court applies Louisiana's duty-risk analysis to assess whether the plaintiff has stated a plausible claim for negligence regarding AGP's alleged failures to properly qualify, train, and supervise employee driver Laurencio Elier. The court concludes that Plaintiff's allegations amount to more than conclusory recitations and explain how AGP's conduct led to an unqualified driver carelessly operating a substandard truck on a highway in rainy conditions.
Holdings
The court denied Defendant AGP Transport, LLC's Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss Plaintiff Rodney Colletti's independent negligence claim. The court determined that Plaintiff has adequately pleaded the necessary elements of negligence, including that AGP owed him a duty of care to properly qualify, train, and supervise employee driver Laurencio Elier, that AGP breached this duty through inadequate training and supervision, and that this breach caused the vehicular accident. The court found that any discoverable information regarding Elier's qualifications or AGP's training protocols remains in AGP's control and is not the plaintiff's responsibility to plead at this stage, allowing Plaintiff the opportunity to fully develop the evidence through discovery.
Remedies
The Court denied Defendant AGP Transport, LLC's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, allowing Plaintiff Rodney Colletti's independent negligence claim against AGP to proceed. The Court determined that Plaintiff's allegations create a plausible claim for relief and declined to dismiss the case at this stage, permitting discovery to develop evidence in support of the claim.
Legal Principles
- A trucking company's duty of care may extend to hiring, training, supervision, and retention of its employee drivers. To state a plausible negligence claim, Plaintiff must allege facts showing: (1) injury suffered; (2) defendant owed a duty of care; (3) defendant breached that duty; (4) conduct was cause-in-fact of harm; and (5) risk of harm was within scope of duty breached. The Louisiana Supreme Court recognizes that a trucking company's duty extends to qualifying, training, and supervising employee drivers.
- To establish breach of duty in negligence claims, Plaintiff must allege facts showing defendant failed to properly qualify, train, or supervise the driver. The Court found Plaintiff's allegations that AGP failed to properly train or supervise Elier, and negligently entrusted him with the vehicle despite his lack of qualifications, create a plausible claim for relief. These allegations explain how AGP's conduct led to an unqualified driver carelessly operating a substandard truck.
- Common sense indicates that a poorly trained, supervised, or insufficiently skilled driver operating a faulty 18-wheeler could cause an accident. A jury could plausibly find that the vehicular accident and Plaintiff's injuries were foreseeable effects of AGP's failure to train Elier on operating an 18-wheeler in rainy conditions, and failure to supervise his driving and ensure he was qualified for the position.
Precedent Name
- Cuvillier v. Taylor
- Santangelo v. Omni Hotels Mgmt. Corp.
- Lormand v. U.S. Unwired, Inc.
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal
- Intres v. Ace American Insurance Company
- Quezada v. MDS Trucking V Inc.
- Martin v. Thomas
Cited Statute
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
Judge Name
Susie Morgan
Passage Text
- The Court declines to dismiss Plaintiff's independent negligence claim against AGP.
- This type of discoverable information is exclusively in the control and possession of AGP. The Fifth Circuit has held that in such a situation, it is not necessarily a plaintiff's responsibility to provide this non-accessible information in his complaint.
- Accordingly, to state a plausible claim of negligence, Plaintiff must allege facts that, accepted as true, show that (1) he suffered an injury; (2) AGP owed him a duty of care; (3) AGP breached that duty; (4) the conduct in question was the cause-in-fact of the resulting harm; and (5) the risk of harm was within the scope of protection afforded by the duty breached.