Network F.O.B., Inc. v. P & J Express, LLC
0:13-cv-03656
D. MinnesotaMar 17, 2014Background
- Network F.O.B., Inc. hired P&J Express to transport a shipment of produce from Arizona to Canada; the shipment was lost in an accident en route.
- Plaintiff seeks damages under 49 U.S.C. § 14706 for value of the produce, freight charges, lost profits, and incidental costs.
- P&J Express moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) on three grounds: preemption, failure to allege delivery in good condition, and failure to allege timely non-judicial remedies.
- The court addresses whether § 14706 preempts state-law claims and whether the complaint plausibly alleges good-condition delivery and pre-suit claim notification.
- The court denies the motion to dismiss, concluding the complaint plausibly states a § 14706 claim and alleges timely filing of a claim with P&J Express.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preemption of state-law claims by § 14706 | Network F.O.B. pleads only § 14706; preemption arguments are inapplicable. | § 14706 is the exclusive remedy and preempts other claims. | Preemption not dispositive; § 14706 claim survives dismissal. |
| Delivery in good condition | Complaint alleges delivery in good condition, supported by signed bill of lading showing no damage. | Evidence at issue; complaint insufficient. | Complaint plausibly alleges good-condition delivery. |
| Pre-suit notification of loss | Complaint alleges a claim filed with P&J Express seeking recovery. | Need for pre-suit notification to be plausibly alleged. | Complaint plausibly alleges pre-suit claim filing. |
Key Cases Cited
- National Transportation, Inc. v. Inn Foods, Inc., 827 F.2d 351 (8th Cir. 1987) (shipper must show goods delivered, in good condition, damaged after delivery, and damages)
- Minnesota Majority v. Mansky, 708 F.3d 1051 (8th Cir. 2013) (court may consider materials embraced by the pleadings on a motion to dismiss)
- Pillsbury Co. v. Illinois Central Gulf R.R., 687 F.2d 241 (8th Cir. 1982) (pleading standard focuses on plausibility of the complaint)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (S. Ct. 2007) (plausibility pleading standard for stating a claim)
- Seaboard Express Co. v. Pastime Amusement Co., 299 U.S. 28 (1936) (text of the statute covers all damages for failure to discharge carrier’s duties)