Case Explained: Johnson v. Regional Supplemental Services, et al.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Filed: 2026-07-07

Docket: 2:25-CV-00035-ABJ)

The Tenth Circuit reversed the district court’s dismissal of William Douglas Johnson III’s negligence claim against Regional Supplemental Services, Inc. (RSS), holding that the lower court erred by failing to accept the plaintiff’s factual allegations as true. The court determined that under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and the *Twombly/Iqbal* plausibility standard, a complaint must be evaluated based solely on its well-pled facts and attached documents, not on new factual assertions introduced by the defendant in a motion to dismiss. The court applied Wyoming negligence law, which requires a plaintiff to show a duty of care, a breach of that duty, proximate cause, and compensable damages. The opinion emphasized that RSS had a non-delegable regulatory duty under 49 C.F.R. § 382.705(b)(1)(iv) to accurately report drug test refusals to the FMCSA Clearinghouse. The district court committed reversible error by substituting its own factual finding—that RSS reported Johnson’s behavior as “confrontational” under 49 C.F.R. § 40.191(a)(8)—for the complaint’s specific allegation that RSS reported a “failed or decline to take an additional test” under 49 C.F.R. § 40.191(a)(6). Because the complaint alleged that the reported reason was inaccurate (the first sample temperature was normal, negating the need for a second test), and because the court must accept these allegations as true at the motion to dismiss stage, Johnson plausibly stated a claim that RSS breached its duty of care. The practical consequence is that the case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this decision, allowing Johnson’s negligence lawsuit to proceed rather than being dismissed on the pleadings.

Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.