In a major victory, the Eighth Judicial District Court in Clark County, Nevada denied a motion for summary judgment brought by Amazon Logistics, Inc. seeking to absolve it of liability for injuries caused by one of its “Relay” truck drivers. The Court determined that questions of fact concerning Amazon’s control over the Relay program and its drivers require a jury trial.
Relay is a program Amazon uses to move products between its warehouses. The system, which is centered around a smartphone application called the “Relay app,” involves truck drivers hauling Amazon-owned trailers between Amazon warehouses.
The underlying incident occurred during the early morning hours of October 29, 2021. Kassahun Altaye, who was hauling a Relay trailer from Salt Lake City to Las Vegas and following the Relay app’s navigation, was directed on to Las Vegas Boulevard in a rural area north of Las Vegas. Mr. Altaye testified the Relay app instructed him to perform a U-turn to return to the freeway on-ramp and take Interstate 15. Although Mr. Altaye’s own company prohibited U-turns, Mr. Altaye testified he complied with Amazon’s navigation and performed the U-turn. The U-turn was unsuccessful, which led to the trailer obstructing both lanes of travel in the darkness and our client striking the trailer with his verhicle, resulting in severe injuries.
Amazon’s motion for summary judgment contended it cannot be responsible for Relay drivers as a matter of law. In Nevada, as in many other states, an “employer” is vicariously liable for the acts or omissions of an “employee.” Whether someone is an “employee” turns on whether the “employer” has the power to control the method and details of how that person performs the work. If the “employer” does control those methods and details, then it is responsible for the employee’s negligence.
Amazon argued that Relay drivers like Mr. Altaye are “independent contractors” and thus not within its control. Responding on behalf of our client, Panish | Shea | Ravipudi LLP attorneys presented evidence showing Amazon’s power to control the method and details of Relay work, including contractually-required Relay app usage, specific directions for drivers to follow, and detailed supervision of Relay drivers when on the job. Considering all of the evidence, Judge Veronica Barisich of the Eighth Judicial District Court denied Amazon’s motion and directed that the issue of Amazon’s control would be tried to a jury.
“We look forward to trying the issue of Amazon’s control over the Relay drivers before a jury,” said attorney Ian Samson. “The evidence of Amazon’s control in this case is compelling, including the evidence of Amazon’s direction for the U-turn to be done. We are eager to tell our client’s story to the jury.”
The trial is scheduled for May 2026 in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Plaintiff is represented by firm attorneys Rahul Ravipudi, Ian Samson, and Rachel Gezerseh.