ABF Freight Forms and Documents Forms and documents may be vi. Some PDF forms (e.g. bill of lading) may be completed by selecting the form, editing the . FREIGHT CHARGES ARE PREPAID ON THIS BILL OF LADING UNLESS MARKED COLLECT SHIPPER PLEASE NOTE STRAIGHT BILL OF LADING. hereby certifies that he is familiar with all the terms and conditions of the said bill of lading and the said terms and conditions are hereby agreed to by the shipper.
|Published (Last):||26 October 2018|
|PDF File Size:||6.61 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||15.77 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The parties have consented to have this case heard to judgment by a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U. The motion is fully briefed and I have carefully considered the arguments and biol submitted. For the following reason, the motion [ 19] is granted. This damage, according to Plaintiffs, was in breach of their contract with ABF.
Defendant removed the case to this court pursuant to 28 U. District Courts have original jurisdiction of any civil action arising under any Act of Congress regulating commerce. This statutory section provides that an action brought pursuant to 49 U. Accordingly this Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this dispute. Under Rule 56 c of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, summary judgment should be entered if and only if there is no genuine issue as to any material fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
In ruling on a summary judgment motion, the court may not weigh the evidence or resolve issues of fact; disputed facts must be left for resolution at trial. The court has one task and one task only: The court is to examine all admissible facts, viewing the entirety of the af and accepting all facts and drawing all reasonable inferences in favor of the non-movant, Erdman v. Village of Winnetka, F.
The proper inquiry is whether a rational trier of fact could reasonably find for the party opposing the motion with respect to the particular issue. If the undisputed facts indicate that no reasonable jury could find for the party opposing the motion, then summary judgment must be granted.
If the non-moving party fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial, then summary judgment is proper. Those denials are therefore disregarded.
ABF is a motor carrier. After doing some internet research, they selected ABF as their preferred carrier to move their household goods and some tools and equipment from a family-owned business.
According to the Hoovers, this was laring primary reason they selected ABF, as opposed to a regular moving company, as their carrier.
ABF simply transports the goods to the designated destination, where the customer is responsible for unloading them. Then ABF picks up the empty trailer several days later. ABF offers two types of liability coverage for your goods. This standard coverage is included with your quote at no additional charge.
The second coverage is carrier negligence liability which covers your items at 10 cents per pound per piece for loss or damage cause by carrier negligence.
bull Leeann contacted an ABF number and obtained a price quote. At some point before January 3,she claims to have contacted by telephone or email: She states that she was again informed of the availability of additional insurance, and she claims to have ordered the additional insurance either by email or by telephone once again, she does not recall whichselecting the maximum available.
She made another call to the number to add an additional ramp at the destination. According to Leeann, the bill of lading delivered with the empty trailer did not reflect the additional insurance she had ordered.
She claims that she called the number shown on the bill of lading and spoke with a customer service representative who told her a corrected bill of lading would be provided when the trailer was picked up for transport.
The Hoovers originally estimated that they agf need 12 linear feet. As they packed, they learned they would need more space, ultimately using 28 linear feet.
Bits & Pieces
On January 5, Leeann states that she telephoned the number again to notify ABF that they would require a full trailer. She states that she was told the driver would have the correct information when he arrived to pick up the trailer and would telephone the information for a corrected bill of lading. On January 6,an ABF driver arrived to pick up the trailer.
With him was the same bill of lading the Hoovers had received on January 3, showing that only 12 feet of the trailer was used, and omitting any reference to additional insurance. The Plaintiffs claim that the driver made a telephone call and then told them that the bill of lading would be corrected to include a full trailer and to reflect the additional insurance they had requested.
Leeann Hoover signed the bill of lading without making any changes or additions other than the corrected linear feet mentioned aboveand the driver left with the full trailer. The bill of lading showed the weight of the trailer as 5, pounds, which is an estimated weight based on 12 feet. The actual weight of the trailer was substantially more than that. The precise weight is disputed, with the Hoovers claiming that it weighed over 24, pounds fully loaded and the Defendant claiming that the average weight for 28 linear feet of household goods is 12, pounds.
Meadows asked Leeann to go to the Florida terminal to inspect the damages. She and her husband did so the following day, meeting with James Frazierthe supervisor on duty. Apparently, the trailer was re-loaded by ABF employees. In her affidavit, Leeann Hoover recites a number of statements allegedly made by Frazier, all of which are clearly immaterial to the issues now before the Court.
The driver began an inspection of the goods, but left and never returned to complete the inspection.
Three days later, another driver agf to pick up the trailer; he knew nothing about the damage report or an inspection. He told her to complete a claim form. She received a claim form via FAX. The parties differ on the exact date the claim was made, January 24 or January The form is dated January 24, Plaintiffs claim to have submitted their claim via FAX on January 25, Neither party has ascribed any significance to the one-day discrepancy. Plaintiffs made numerous phone calls to ABF, but were never successful at obtaining any further information about their claim.
A telephone call to headquarters revealed that ABF claimed never to have received the claim. Leeann Hoover faxed a copy of the January 25 claim on September 25,along with the fax confirmation sheet from the original claim.
In October, they were told the claim could not be processed until the Hoovers provided ABF with an estimated weights of the shipped goods.
The Hoovers, who had no information about the weight of the trailer, obtained an attorney and filed this litigation. The documents pertinent to this transaction are as follows. The bill of lading issued by ABF consists of 2 pages.
Beneath that information is a table, as shown below:. ABF does not provide insurance for your goods. Because you control how your goods are packed and loaded, our liability coverage only applies when ABF is negligent.
If additional coverage is purchased, you are purchasing additional liability coverage for our negligence, not insurance for your goods. Customer acknowledges that ABF is a general commodity carrier and that this shipment will be subject only to the laws and regulations governing commodity carriage.
This shipment shall be subject only to Federal laws and statutes.
Bill Of Lading Template Canada Abf Freight Forms And Documents Arcbest
No state laws or statutes shall apply. Immediately above the signature section is the following paragraph:. By signing below, Customer agrees to the terms and conditions herein, the rules and special service charges in ABF series and the terms and conditions in the Uniform Straight bill of lading UBL as published in the National Motor Freight Classification in effect on the date of this bill of lading.
Driver signature only acknowledges receipt of freight. Plaintiffs dispute that this Tariff was part of their contract with ABF because they never saw it and were never given a reasonable opportunity to agree to the limits stated in the Tariff.
Whether the Tariff was part of their contract is an issue discussed further below. Certainly, however, the Tariff is material to an understanding of the factual allegations and evidence. It is therefore set forth here.
It contains no information at all about additional insurance. Charles Hoover signed this document. On the last page, it shows the weight 5, and in all capital letters, surrounded by asterisks, the document states:. Although Plaintiff appears to argue that this is the bill of lading, I disagree. The section of the document quoted above refers to the Uniform bill of lading as a separate document.
The date of this document is January 12, the date on which the damaged goods were delivered to the Hoovers in Pekin. A motor carrier operating in interstate commerce, such as ABF, is governed by the provisions of the Interstate Commerce Act.
Hoover v. ABF Freight Systems, Inc. – Central Analysis Bureau
North American Van Lines, Inc. The Carmack Amendment provides that:. That carrier … [is] liable to the bilk entitled to recover under the receipt or bill of lading. The liability imposed under this paragraph is for the actual loss or injury to the property caused by … the delivering carrier.
See, Missouri Pacific R. A carrier can, however, limit its liability to the shipper for damage to household goods. The Carmack Amendment also provides that:. A carrier providing transportation … may … establish rates for the transportation of property … under which the liability of the carrier for such property is limited to a value established by written or electronic declaration of the shipper or abc written laving between the carrier and shipper if that value would be reasonable under the circumstances surrounding the transportation.
In order to effectively limit its liability, a carrier must do four things. First, the carrier must maintain a tariff as required by the Laving. In the tariff, the carrier must list each rate available with terms and conditions for each rate.
United Van Lines, Inc. Second, the carrier must give the shipper a reasonable opportunity to choose to accept the proposed limit on liability. United Van Lines, F. Pony Express Courier Corp. Greyhound Van Lines Inc.
The agreement must specify the released rate and state that the released rate applies unless the shipper expressly requests additional coverage.