49 C.F.R. § 1005.1
Applicability of regulations
The regulations set forth in this part shall govern the processing of claims for loss, damage, injury, or delay to property transported or accepted for transportation, in interstate or foreign commerce, by each railroad, express company, motor carrier, water carrier, and freight forwarder (hereinafter called carrier), subject to the Interstate Commerce Act.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 22
cases, 1979–2019 · leading case: Wisconsin Packing Co., Inc. v. Indiana Refrigerator Lines, Inc., 618 F.2d 441 (7th Cir. 1980).
Wisconsin Packing Co., Inc. v. Indiana Refrigerator Lines, Inc., 618 F.2d 441 (7th Cir. 1980). “" 49 C.F.R. 1005.1 reproduced in 340 I.C.C.”
Siemens Power Transmission & Distrib., Inc. v. Norfolk S. Ry. Co., 420 F.3d 1243 (11th Cir. 2005). “8 As stated by the First Circuit, the regulations’ section discussing the “[applicability of the regulations,” 49 C.F.R. § 1005.1 , does not distinguish between contested and uncontested claims.”
Nedlloyd Lines, B v. Corp. v. Harris Transp. Co., Inc., 922 F.2d 905 (1st Cir. 1991). “” 49 C.F.R. § 1005.1 . This language does not limit the regulations to claims that will be settled voluntarily.”
Pathway Bellows, Inc. v. Robert W. Blanchette, Richard C. Bond & John H. McArthur Trs. of the Penn Cent. Transp. Co., 630 F.2d 900 (2d Cir. 1980). “To the contrary, 49 C.F.R. § 1005.1 , the section dealing specifically with the applicability of the regulations, provides as follows: The regulations set forth in this part shall govern the processing of claims for loss, damage, injury, or delay to property transported or…”
Gen. Elec. Co. v. Brown Transp. Corp., 597 F. Supp. 1258 (E.D. Va. 1984). “49 C.F.R. § 1005.1 . The regulations require claims to be submitted in writing, and set forth minimum filing requirements which include identifying the shipment, asserting liability and claiming damages of a specified or determinable amount of money.”
Fed. Carr. Cas. P 83,866 Richard Salzstein & Candice Salzstein v. Bekins Van Lines Inc., a Nebraska Corp., 993 F.2d 1187 (5th Cir. 1993). “1993), and Interstate Commerce Commission (“ICC”) regulations, 49 C.F.R. §§ 1005.1 -.7 (1992). These regulations control the processing of claims for loss or damage to property transported by common carriers, including motor carriers, subject to the Interstate Commerce Act.”
Larry Culver & Marine Off. of Am. Corp. v. Boat Transit, Inc., 782 F.2d 1467 (9th Cir. 1986). “§ 11707 (e), and regulatory requirements for claim forms, 49 C.F.R. §§ 1005.1 -.3 (1984). In addition to section 2(b), language in the bill of lading states that any damage or shortages must be noted on the bill of lading at delivery and concealed damage must be reported to the…”
Rehm v. Baltimore Storage Co., 300 F. Supp. 2d 408 (W.D. Va. 2004). “” 49 C.F.R. § 1005.1 . Furthermore, the regulations in part 1005 make reference to damage to “baggage,” “cargo,” “package,” and “shipment” but do not contain any mention of claims relating to residential damage.”
Trailblazers Int'l, Inc. v. Cent. Freight Lines, Inc., 951 F. Supp. 121 (S.D. Tex. 1996). “§ 11707 , and Interstate Commerce Commission (“ICC”) regulations, 49 C.F.R. §§ 1005.1 -.7. These regulations control the processing of claims for loss or damage to property transported by common carriers (including defendants in this case) subject to the Interstate Commerce Act.”
Aida Dayton Tech. Corp. v. I.T.O. Corp. of Baltimore, 137 F. Supp. 2d 637 (D. Maryland 2001). “R § 1005.2(a). At a minimum, the written claim must: “(1) Contain[ ] facts sufficient to identify the baggage or shipment (or shipments) of property; (2) assert[ ] liability for alleged loss, damage, injury, or delay, and (3) make[ ][a] claim for the payment of a specified or…”
Aida Dayton Tech. Corp. v. Trism Specialized Carriers, Inc., 178 F. Supp. 2d 505 (D. Maryland 2001). “” According to AIDA, the January 12, 1998 letter constituted its valid claim, and the limitations period did not begin to run until October 14, 1998 when the claim made on January 12, 1998 was denied by Trism.”
Wisconsin Packing Co., Inc., a Wisconsin Corp., Plaintiff v. Indiana Refrigerator Lines, Inc., an Indiana Corp., 604 F.2d 1022 (7th Cir. 1979). “subject to the Interstate Commerce Act,” ( 49 C.F.R. § 1005.1 ), they provide the Court with a useful guide as to what should constitute a sufficient notice of claim.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.