## Facts

- A minor, Hazel Cruz, was injured in a June 7, 2012 automobile collision caused by Lyle J. Carman while Carman drove a dump truck.
- Carman was employed by Lopez Trucking and drove a dump truck owned by Carlos J. Lopez (d/b/a Lopez Trucking).
- Carman had spent the day hauling debris from a construction project for which Werner Construction, Inc. was the general contractor, under an oral arrangement between Werner and Lopez Trucking.
- At the time of the crash, Carman had completed his final delivery and was returning the truck to the location designated by Lopez for overnight parking.
- Post-collision testing indicated Carman was under the influence of controlled substances (amphetamine and methamphetamine).
- Edgar Cruz, as next friend of Hazel, sued Carman for negligence; sued Lopez on vicarious liability; and sued Werner alleging (a) Werner exercised complete and exclusive control over the truck or (b) Carman was Werner’s “statutory employee” under Nebraska intrastate motor carrier statutes.

## Issues

1. Whether Nebraska’s intrastate motor carrier statutes (including Neb. Rev. Stat. § 75-363) impute an employer-employee relationship between a general contractor and a subcontracting motor carrier’s driver, making the general contractor vicariously liable under *respondeat superior*.
2. Whether Werner could be liable under any recognized common-law exception to the rule that one who hires an independent contractor is not liable for the contractor’s negligence.

## Decision

- The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for Werner.
- The court held Carman was not Werner’s common-law employee and Werner lacked the type of control over Carman’s work required for *respondeat superior* liability.
- The court held Nebraska’s intrastate motor carrier statutory scheme does not create a “statutory employee” relationship imposing vicarious tort liability on a general contractor for a subcontractor-driver’s negligence.
- The court held no exception to independent-contractor nonliability applied on the record (including retained control or inherently dangerous activity), so Werner owed no duty on the theories asserted.

## Legal Principles

- Summary judgment is reviewed de novo, viewing evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and drawing reasonable inferences in that party’s favor.
- *Respondeat superior* vicarious liability requires an employment/agency relationship, commonly assessed by the alleged employer’s right to control the manner and means of the work.
- Nebraska’s intrastate motor carrier statutes regulating carrier operations and safety do not, without clear legislative direction, alter common-law agency rules by imputing an employer-employee relationship for tort vicarious liability.
- As a general rule, one who hires an independent contractor is not liable for the contractor’s negligence absent a recognized exception that creates a duty (e.g., retained control over the manner/means of performance, inherently dangerous work, or a nondelegable duty).
- A factual dispute defeats summary judgment only if it concerns facts material to the controlling legal standards.

## Conclusion

The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed judgment for the general contractor because the driver remained the subcontractor’s employee under common-law control principles, Nebraska intrastate motor carrier statutes did not impose “statutory employee” vicarious liability, and the evidence did not place the case within any exception to independent-contractor nonliability.


Cruz v. Lopez, 919 N.W.2d 479 (Neb. 2018)