Declared Value

32 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Edward and Nancy Hughes v. United van Lines, Inc.
  829 F.2d 1407· 7th Cir.· 1987-09-11 ·cited 49×
  The Carmack Amendment preempts state and common law remedies for loss or damage to goods during interstate transit, and the defendants properly limited their liability under the amendment.
• Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. v. Ry. Express Agency, Inc.
  253 F.2d 780· 6th Cir.· 1958-04-01 ·cited 44×
  A valid defense to a claim does not, as a matter of legal certainty, preclude federal jurisdiction if the plaintiff's claim for the jurisdictional amount was made in good faith.
• Tishman & Lipp, Inc. v. DELTA AIR Lines
  413 F.2d 1401· 2d Cir.· 1969-07-31 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the airline's filed tariffs, which excluded liability for jewelry shipped as baggage, governed the loss, and the passenger's failure to declare the jewelry's value precluded recovery.
• Klicker v. Nw. Airlines, Inc.
  563 F.2d 1310· 9th Cir.· 1977-11-01 ·cited 24×
  The court held that an airline tariff rule attempting to fully exculpate the carrier from liability for its own negligence is void as against public policy, and that other tariff rules limiting liability do not apply when the carrier refuses to allow the passenger to declare a hi
• Caten v. Salt City Movers & Storage Co., Inc.
  149 F.2d 428· 2d Cir.· 1945-05-14 ·cited 24×
  A carrier's attempt to limit liability is void unless the shipper expressly declares or agrees to a released value in writing, and oral agreements or carrier-generated writings without shipper assent are insufficient.
• United States Fire Ins. Co. v. Hayden Bonded Storage Co.
  930 So. 2d 686· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-04-05 ·cited 21×
  United States Fire Insurance Company appeals a trial court judgment finding it breached its duty to indemnify its insured, Hayden Bonded Storage Company, by refusing to pay more than $35,070 on a $475,000 settlement judgment. The appellate court reversed, holding that USFIC did n
• Mech. Tech. Inc. v. Ryder Truck Lines, Inc.
  776 F.2d 1085· 2d Cir.· 1985-11-14 ·cited 20×
  A shipper's failure to declare a released value on a bill of lading, when presented with a tariff offering different liability levels, results in the shipment being released at the lowest liability rate specified in the tariff, even without explicit knowledge of the tariff's term
• Underwriters AT Lloyds OF London v. N. Am. van Lines
  890 F.2d 1112· 10th Cir.· 1989-11-30 ·cited 13×
  The Carmack Amendment to the Interstate Commerce Act preempts state common law remedies for negligent damage to goods shipped by common carrier, including claims for full value beyond contractual limitations.
• Twentieth Century Delivery Serv., Inc. v. ST. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co.
  242 F.2d 292· 9th Cir.· 1957-01-24 ·cited 12×
  A delivery service performing ground transportation for an air carrier is entitled to the benefit of liability limitations in the air carrier's tariffs, even if not a formal party to the airbill.
• Howe v. Allied van Lines, Inc.
  622 F.2d 1147· 3d Cir.· 1980-05-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that Section 22 of the Interstate Commerce Act allows the government to contract with carriers for reduced rates and limitations of liability, exempting these arrangements from the full liability requirements of Section 20(11).
• Household Goods Carriers' Bureau & Movers' & Warehousemen's Ass'n of Am., Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & United States
  584 F.2d 437· D.C. Cir.· 1978-06-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Interstate Commerce Commission's order amending rules governing carrier liability for loss and damages to goods was not arbitrary or irrational and denied the petitions for review.
• Thomas v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.
  457 F.2d 1053· 3d Cir.· 1972-03-15 ·cited 6×
• Perera Co., Inc. v. Varig Brazilian Airlines, Inc.
  775 F.2d 21· 2d Cir.· 1985-09-16 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the airline's use of a net bag for valuable cargo, even if negligent, did not constitute wilful misconduct under the Warsaw Convention, and the shipper's failure to prove proximate causation for the loss meant they could not recover the full value.
• Hill Constr. Corp. v. Am. Airlines, Inc.
  996 F.2d 1315· 1st Cir.· 1993-06-29 ·cited 4×
  A contract provision limiting an air carrier's liability for lost or damaged cargo is valid and applicable even if the carrier breaches the carriage contract, provided the limitation is reasonably communicated and offers the shipper an option to declare a higher value.
• Mass v. Braswell Motor Freight Lines, Inc.
  577 F.2d 665· 9th Cir.· 1978-07-05 ·cited 4×
  A shipper who intentionally fails to disclose the high value of a shipment to obtain a lower freight rate is barred from recovery for a loss the carrier did not anticipate.
• Furmanik v. Ne. Airlines, Inc.
  266 So. 2d 352· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-05-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that filed and approved tariff regulations can limit an airline's liability, even in cases of negligence.
• Am. Viscose Corp. v. Rothensies
  121 F.2d 186· 3d Cir.· 1941-06-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the challenged tax statutes were constitutional and that the lower courts properly dismissed the complaints.
• Nat'l BUS Traffic Ass'n, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & the United States
  613 F.2d 881· D.C. Cir.· 1979-09-12 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the Commission's order finding the proposed tariff rules unjust and unreasonable, holding that the National Bus Traffic Association failed to prove the necessity of value limitations for incidental bus express service or the reasonableness of prohibiting certai
• Gellert v. United Airlines
  474 F.2d 77· 10th Cir.· 1973-02-16 ·cited 2×
  A carrier's total liability, including consequential damages, is limited to the declared value of the shipment as per applicable tariff rules, even if the carrier did not elect to exclude consequential damages.
• N. FUR Co., Inc. v. Minneapolis
  224 F.2d 181· 7th Cir.· 1955-06-29 ·cited 2×
  A railroad acting as a carrier handling an express shipment, even if not a common carrier for that specific transaction, is entitled to the benefit of liability limitations in the express receipt issued by the express company.
• St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. v. Marine Transp. Servs. Sea-Barge Grp., Inc.
  1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15848· S.D. Fla.· 1989-12-14 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (COGSA) provided the exclusive remedy for claims of bailment and negligence, barring those claims. The court also found that the carrier's insurance was excess to the shipper's insurer, and the shipper failed to prove insurance
• Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London v. BE Logistics, Inc.
  736 F. Supp. 2d 1311· S.D. Fla.· 2010-07-02
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to adequately plead a claim under the Carmack Amendment, and the carrier's liability was limited to the declared value on the bill of lading.
• Kemper Ins. Cos. v. Fed. Express Corp.
  170 F. Supp. 2d 1241· S.D. Fla.· 2001-06-25
  The court held that FedEx's liability limitations were enforceable under both the Warsaw Convention and federal common law, as the air waybills complied with the Convention's requirements and the shippers had reasonable notice and the option for greater protection under the relea
• Hampton v. Fed. Express Corp.
  917 F.2d 1119· 8th Cir.· 1990-10-29
  A common carrier may limit its liability under the released value doctrine if the shipper is given a reasonable opportunity to declare a higher value and pay an additional fee, even if the plaintiff was not a party to the contract.
• Brandon Transfer & Storage Co. v. Hall
  377 So. 2d 716· Fla. 4th DCA· 1979-10-03
  Brandon Transfer & Storage Company lost Mrs. Hall's stored goods and was sued for damages. The court reversed the jury's $65,000 verdict, holding that Mrs. Hall's signed declaration of $5,000 value in the moving estimate constituted acceptance of a liability limitation clause lim
• Zimmerman v. Allied van Lines, Inc.
  317 F.2d 72· 9th Cir.· 1963-05-07
  The court held that the shipper is entitled to recover the full declared value of the shipment when the actual loss exceeds that value, and the carrier's liability is limited by the declared value under federal law.
• Kassvan v. Thomas E. McElroy Co.
  179 F.2d 97· 7th Cir.· 1950-01-12
  The court held that the defendant was not negligent as a matter of law for undervaluing the returned furs, as the plaintiffs' own actions and insurance coverage indicated a reliance on insurance rather than the carrier for protection against loss.