49 U.S.C. § 13702
Tariff requirement for certain transportation
Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in sections 10761 and 10762 of this title prior to the general amendment of this subtitle by Pub. L. 104–88, § 102(a).
Section effective
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 40
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1996–2023 · leading case: Chen v. Mayflower Transit, Inc., 315 F. Supp. 2d 886 (N.D. Ill. 2004).
Chen v. Mayflower Transit, Inc., 315 F. Supp. 2d 886 (N.D. Ill. 2004). “49 U.S.C. § 13702 (c)(1) provides that a carrier engaged in household goods transportation “shall maintain rates and related rules and practices in a published tariff.”
In Re Hawaiian & Guamanian Cabotage Antitrust Litig., 647 F. Supp. 2d 1250 (W.D. Wash. 2009). “at ¶ 80; see also 49 U.S.C. §§ 13702 & 14101(b). In the Consolidated Complaint, plaintiffs allege that defendants have colluded not to use extra-tariff written agreements with their customers; plaintiffs suggest that such agreements would be “confidential” and would inhibit…”
Werner Enter., Inc. v. Westwind Mar. Int'l, Inc., 554 F.3d 1319 (11th Cir. 2009). “803, 868-69 (codified at 49 U.S.C. § 13702 ). As a result, Ace argues that the Supreme *1325 Court's reliance on Great Northern no longer justifies the expansion of Kirby into non-maritime law because cargo owners no longer have notice of liability limitations in carriers'…”
Gaines Motor Lines, Inc. v. Klaussner Furniture Indus., Inc., 734 F.3d 296 (4th Cir. 2013). “See 49 U.S.C. § 13702 (b). Section 14101(b)(1) only excludes motor carriers transporting household goods.”
In Re Hawaiian & Guamanian Cabotage Antitrust Litig., 754 F. Supp. 2d 1239 (W.D. Wash. 2010). “See Amended Complaint at ¶¶ 13, 15, 17, 18, 20, & 23; see also 49 U.S.C. § 13702 (a)(1). 7 Second, the Amended Complaint alleges that defendant Matson Navigation Company, Inc.”
DHX, INC. v. Surface Transp. Bd., 501 F.3d 1080 (9th Cir. 2007). “§ 14101 (a); (2) they are required to file tariffs, see 49 U.S.C. § 13702 (a) and (b); and (3) they are required to maintain “reasonable” rates and practices, see 49 U.”
Emerson Elec. Supply Co. v. Estes Express Lines Corp., 451 F.3d 179 (3rd Cir. 2006). “See 49 U.S.C. § 13702 (a). For carriers that are not required to file tariffs, they must still “provide to the shipper, on request of the shipper, a written or electronic copy of the rate, classification, rules, and practices, upon which any rate .”
Emmert Indus. Corp. v. Artisan Assocs., Inc., 497 F.3d 982 (9th Cir. 2007). “” See 49 U.S.C. § 13702 (a). We note, however, that while the ICCTA largely does away with the tariff requirement, it also requires non-tariff filing carriers, upon request, to disclose the same information contained in a filed tariff.”
Thomas Mervyn v. Atlas Van Lines, Inc., 882 F.3d 680 (7th Cir. 2018). “49 U.S.C. § 13702 (b)(1). One of the tariff rates is for "linehaul," which is based on the weight of the goods and the distance they are shipped.”
Baltimore & Ohio Chicago Terminal R.R. Co. v. Wisconsin Cent. Ltd., 154 F.3d 404 (7th Cir. 1998). “The clause requires arbitration of all irreconcilable disputes arising out of the agreement, and all includes the dispute over whether BOCT’s reliance on the agreement as a basis for seeking the recovery of its switching charges and car-rental fees was blocked by the…”
TAG/ICIB Servs., Inc. v. Pan Am. Grain Co., 215 F.3d 172 (1st Cir. 2000). “See 49 U.S.C. § 13702 . This court has held that maritime carriers have a private federal cause of action to recover container demurrage charges specified in tariffs under the Shipping Act (as well as under the Intercoastal Shipping Act of 1933, 46 U.”
Rushton v. Am. Pac. Wood Prods., Inc. (In Re Americana Expressways, Inc.), 133 F.3d 752 (10th Cir. 1997). “The district court 1 found that after filing a Chapter 11 petition Americana, as debtor in possession, was required to file an adoption notice pursuant to 49 C.”
— 49 U.S.C. § 13702(b)(2)(A) — 2 cases
Kloosterboer Int'l Forwarding LLC v. United States of Am. (D. Alaska 2021).
Kloosterboer Int'l Forwarding LLC v. United States of Am. (D. Alaska 2022).
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.