District court refuses to reconsider Carmack preemption of cargo claimBy William D. BrejchaNovember 2011In Personal Communications Devices v. Platinum Cargo Logistics, Inc., the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California denied plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration of a partial grant of summary judgment in cargo claim litigation.
Material deviation: A fallacious argument against limitations of motor carrier liabilityBy Craig J. Helmreich & Nathaniel G. SaylorApril 2011Motor carriers and their counsel should consider contract provisions closely—particularly security provisions—and analyze the potential for exposure to claims of material deviation that could be used to avoid bargained for limitations of carrier liability.
Motor carrier defeats HIV-positive driver’s ADA and related claimsBy William D. BrejchaJune 2011The case of EEOC v. C.R. England, Inc. will be helpful to motor carriers and others as it answers some fundamental questions that arise from the ADA statute which have not been previously addressed in detail by the courts.
New Jersey District Court rejects material deviation claimBy William D. BrejchaSeptember 2011The court noted that PMT needed to show UPS’ intentional destruction or theft of the cargo for the liability limit to be ignored and no such evidence had been presented.
Res ipsa and wandering cowsBy William D. BrejchaSeptember 2011Under the res ipsa theory, the facts at issue must be so egregious that the only way the crash in issue could have occurred would be if someone had been negligent.
Seventh Circuit vacates FMCSA EOBR ruleBy William D. BrejchaOctober 2011With this court ruling, it is anticipated FMCSA may need to restart the entire mandatory EOBR rulemaking process and rewrite the rule or issue some supplemental ruling that addressed the harassment issue and other issues that have been raised in evaluating the new rule.
Southern District Of California finds home delivery drivers to be independent contractors, not employeesBy William D. BrejchaJune 2011The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California analyzed each of the ten "common law factors" relating to the drivers’ employment/contractor status, ultimately concluding that plaintiffs’ evidence was insufficient to overcome the Georgia law presumption of independent contractor status for the plaintiff drivers.