Cheyanne Coulson and Shiloh Thomas Glenn Youngblood v. Jaswinder Singh and Paul Express, Inc.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma granted Paul Express, Inc.'s partial motion to dismiss claims for negligent hiring, training, and retention. Applying the Oklahoma Supreme Court's decision in Jordan v. Cates, the court held that those claims were unnecessary where the employer stipulated that the driver acted within the scope of employment and that respondeat superior liability applied. The claims were dismissed without prejudice because amendment could become viable if Oklahoma law changes.

Holdings

1. Under Jordan v. Cates, when an employer stipulates that its employee acted within the scope of employment and that it would be liable under respondeat superior, additional negligent hiring, training, and retention claims are unnecessary and superfluous and may be dismissed.
2. The negligent hiring, training, and retention claims must be dismissed without prejudice rather than with prejudice because a future intervening change in Oklahoma law could render the claims viable, so amendment cannot presently be deemed futile.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Oklahoma law permits negligent hiring, training, and retention claims against an employer that stipulates its employee acted within the scope of employment and that the employer is liable under respondeat superior.
2. Whether the negligent hiring, training, and retention claims should be dismissed with prejudice on the ground that amendment would be futile.

Disposition

dismissed