National Fire Insurance Company of Hartford v. UPS Freight, Inc.
5:16-cv-04785
N.D. Cal.May 10, 2017Background
- National Fire insured Campus Televideo’s video-equipment shipment and sues UPS Freight under the Carmack Amendment after the cargo arrived allegedly severely damaged in Seaside, California; National Fire seeks recovery by subrogation/assignment.
- Shipment originated in Bear, Delaware; bill of lading was clean/straight; parties dispute where damage occurred during transit.
- UPS Freight moved under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) to transfer venue from the Northern District of California (San Jose) to the District of Delaware.
- Plaintiff opposed, asserting the motion was untimely and that California is an appropriate forum because damage was discovered here.
- Court analyzed whether Delaware was a proper venue under the Carmack Amendment and weighed the § 1404(a) convenience and public-interest factors.
- Court concluded venue would be proper in Delaware and that the balance of convenience and interests of justice favor transfer; ordered transfer to District of Delaware.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of § 1404(a) motion | Motion filed ~9 months after filing; should be denied as untimely | § 1404(a) has no timing limit; delay explained by discovery revealing convenience of Delaware | Denied—timing not fatal; motion timely enough given explanation |
| Proper venue under Carmack Amendment | Venue should be analyzed under § 14706(d)(2) (where loss occurred); California appropriate because damage discovered here | § 14706(d)(1) applies (where defendant operates); UPS operates through Delaware so Delaware is proper | Court applied § 14706(d)(1) and found Delaware a proper venue |
| Deference to plaintiff's choice of forum | Plaintiff’s choice (N.D. Cal) merits substantial deference | Minimal deference because operative facts and shipper (insured) are tied to Delaware | Court gave minimal weight to plaintiff’s forum choice; favored transfer |
| Convenience and interest-of-justice factors under § 1404(a) | Costs can be managed (depositions, testimony in California); cargo inspection not necessary here | Witnesses, documents, and cargo located in Delaware; lower litigation costs and easier compulsory process there | Most § 1404(a) factors (witness location, access to proof, costs, compulsory process) favored Delaware; transfer granted |
Key Cases Cited
- Jones v. GNC Franchising, Inc., 211 F.3d 495 (9th Cir.) (factors for § 1404(a) transfer analysis)
- Smallwood v. Allied Van Lines, Inc., 660 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir.) (Carmack Amendment venue considerations)
- Decker Coal Co. v. Commonwealth Edison Co., 805 F.2d 834 (7th Cir.) (defendant must make strong showing to overcome plaintiff's forum choice)
- Van Dusen v. Barrack, 376 U.S. 612 (U.S.) (transfer not permitted to merely shift inconvenience)
- Commodity Futures Trading Comm’n v. Savage, 611 F.2d 270 (9th Cir.) (burden on movant to show balance of convenience clearly favors transfer)
- Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno, 454 U.S. 235 (U.S.) (public-interest factors relevant to transfer)
- Aaacon Auto Transp., Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 537 F.2d 648 (2d Cir.) (Congress intended shippers’ choice of convenient forum under Carmack)
- Hatch v. Reliance Ins. Co., 758 F.2d 409 (9th Cir.) (two-part § 1404(a) inquiry)