Driver qualification files in Georgia truck accident cases

A driver qualification file is the federally required record of why a carrier let a particular person drive, and in a Georgia truck case it can show what the carrier knew or should have known. The rule is 49 C.F.R. § 391.51. A gap in the file can support a hiring or supervision claim, but only if the missing check connects to this crash.

What the file holds and how long

Document	Rule	Minimum period
Employment application	§ 391.21	Employment plus three years
First motor vehicle record	§ 391.23(a)(1)	Employment plus three years
Road test certificate or accepted equivalent	§ 391.31, § 391.33, § 391.44(d)	Employment plus three years
Annual motor vehicle record	§ 391.25(a)	May be removed three years after execution
Note of the annual review	§ 391.25(c)(2)	May be removed three years after execution
Medical examiner's certificate	§ 391.43(g)	May be removed three years after execution
Medical variance	§ 391.49	May be removed three years after execution
Safety performance history	§ 391.53	Employment plus three years, in a separate file

The last row needs care. Safety performance histories go in a separate driver investigation history file under § 391.53, so a request for “the qualification file” alone may not reach them. Name both files.

The driver can stay employed for years while older annual records lawfully leave the file. A request made late may therefore find only the recent ones.

What the carrier had to do, and when

Application. Under § 391.21, it lists accidents and violations from the prior three years, along with employers. For commercial drivers, it reaches seven years further for employers for whom the applicant drove.

Inquiries at hire. Under § 391.23, the carrier must ask each licensing authority for the prior three years of driving history, and it must investigate safety performance with prior employers. The rule allows 30 days from the date employment begins. So in a crash during a driver’s first weeks, a missing record is not automatically a violation. The question becomes what the carrier had already looked at when it put the driver on the road.

Medical certification. Section 391.23(m) is stricter on timing, because the carrier must obtain the certificate and verify the examiner’s listing on the National Registry before allowing the driver to operate. For commercial license holders, § 391.51(b)(6)(ii) relies on the state driver record, and the allowance to use a certificate copy for up to 15 days ran through June 22, 2025. These rules have changed over time, so read the version in force on the relevant date.

Annual review. Under § 391.25, the carrier must, at least every 12 months, obtain the record and review whether the driver meets minimum requirements for safe driving or is disqualified. It must give great weight to violations such as speeding, reckless driving, and operating under the influence. A dated note records the review. So the file shows what a reviewer saw, and it can be compared with what the reviewer then did.

Clearinghouse. The queries under § 382.701 are a separate duty, covered in CDL violations.

From a file gap to a Georgia claim

Negligent hiring and retention. Section 34-7-20 says an employer “is bound to exercise ordinary care in the selection of employees and not to retain them after knowledge of incompetency”. In Western Industries v. Poole, 280 Ga. App. 378 (2006), a negligent hiring and retention claim survived summary judgment, while negligent entrustment and punitive damages did not. In Onsite Communication Services v. Gooch, A26A0424 (2026), the court found a fact question on actual or constructive knowledge of a driver’s drug use and speeding tickets. Those claims can proceed even if the carrier admits employment, under Quynn v. Hulsey, 310 Ga. 473 (2020).

Negligence per se. A violated federal rule can support this theory under § 51-1-6, but it “supplies only the duty and breach of duty elements”, as Central Anesthesia v. Worthy, 254 Ga. 728 (1985), says. Causation is still the plaintiff’s job.

Intrastate trips. Onsite also addressed state adoption of the federal rules for a motor carrier, under Georgia’s rule at Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. 515-16-4-.01. The version applied there came from the date of that crash, so check the date in each case.

The test of a paperwork gap

Ask what the skipped step would have shown.

Gap	Would it have revealed something?	Strength
No annual review, and the record held serious violations	Yes, and the crash involves similar conduct	Stronger
No annual review, and the record was clean	No	Weak on causation
Expired medical certificate, and a medical event caused the crash	Possibly, depending on the condition	Depends on the medical proof
Expired medical certificate, and the driver was rear-ended	No	Weak on causation
Prior employer was never asked, and it would have reported unsafe conduct	Yes, if that employer's records show it	Stronger, with that employer's proof

Parker v. R & L Carriers, 253 Ga. App. 628 (2002), shows the risk, because “the alleged violation of the regulation was not the proximate cause of the accident”. For example, imagine a carrier that skipped a review of a driver whose record held only an old equipment ticket. The omission is real, but a jury would have trouble tying it to a lane-change crash.

A request that reaches everything

• The complete qualification file and driver investigation history file.
• Every motor vehicle record, with its review note.
• Every medical certificate and any variance.
• Responses from prior employers, and proof of attempts where none arrived.
• Clearinghouse query records.
• Road test and training records.
• Internal discipline, complaints, and earlier crash reports.

A driver can hold a valid license and still have a deficient file, because the license reflects the state’s decision and the file reflects the carrier’s. Carrier-side discovery puts these requests in order. The two-year period in § 9-3-33 applies to injury claims.

Sources

• 49 C.F.R. § 391.21
• 49 C.F.R. § 391.23
• 49 C.F.R. § 391.25
• 49 C.F.R. § 391.51
• 49 C.F.R. § 391.53
• Official Code of Georgia Annotated, November 2022 public release: §§ 9-3-33, 34-7-20, 51-1-6
• Western Industries v. Poole, 280 Ga. App. 378
• Onsite Communication Services v. Gooch, A26A0424
• Quynn v. Hulsey, 310 Ga. 473
• Central Anesthesia v. Worthy, 254 Ga. 728
• Parker v. R & L Carriers, 253 Ga. App. 628

This page was last reviewed in November 2026 for general information. Laws and court decisions can change after that date. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship.