Carmack Amendment Claim Not Speculative

March 2006

In February, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan analyzed the sufficiency of evidence necessary to support a claim for damages incurred during shipping against a carrier under the Carmack Amendment.

In Logistics Insight Corp. v. JDL Trucking, L.L.C., Plaintiff Logistics Insight Corp. had a contract with non-party General Motors to arrange for various carriers to deliver automobile parts to GM s assembly plants. En route to GM s plant, Defendant carrier JDL Trucking s truck was involved in a serious accident, damaging several transmissions it was carrying. When the transmissions reached GM s plant, GM refused the entire delivery. Upon further inspection of the damage, GM decided to scrap the entire shipment of transmissions. Logistics Insight paid to cover GM s loss and sought reimbursement from JDL.

JDL moved for summary judgment, claiming that since GM did not inspect each individual transmission the total amount of Logistics Insight s damages claim was purely speculative. Also, JDL argued that Logistics Insight could not prove that the entire shipment was damaged. As a result, JDL concluded that Logistics Insight failed to establish a prima facie case of liability under the Carmack Amendment.

In rejecting the carrier s motion for summary judgment, the Court held that since there was deposition testimony on the value of one transmission, the amount of damages for the transmissions showing visible damage was not speculative. Further, the Court found that, regardless of the specifics of the accident, it was undisputed that there was significant damage to the shipment. Additionally, there was evidence that GM had a policy of rejecting an entire shipment of goods when there was some indication that a traumatic accident had affected the integrity of the goods.

Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to Logistics Insight, the Court found that there was sufficient evidence for a jury to find that the entire shipment had been damaged in the accident. As a result, the Court held that Logistics Insight established a prima facie case under the Carmack Amendment and denied JDL s motion for summary judgment.