U.S. Code » Title 49 » Subtitle SUBTITLE IV— INTERSTATE TRANSPORTATION › Part PART B— MOTOR CARRIERS, WATER CARRIERS, BROKERS, AND FREIGHT FORWARDERS › Chapter CHAPTER 139— REGISTRATION

49 U.S.C. § 13907

Household goods agents

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 49 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)Carriers Responsible for Agents.—Each motor carrier providing transportation of household goods shall be responsible for all acts or omissions of any of its agents which relate to the performance of household goods transportation services (including accessorial or terminal services) and which are within the actual or apparent authority of the agent from the carrier or which are ratified by the carrier.(b)Standard for Selecting Agents.—Each motor carrier providing transportation of household goods shall use due diligence and reasonable care in selecting and maintaining agents who are sufficiently knowledgeable, fit, willing, and able to provide adequate household goods transportation services (including accessorial and terminal services) and to fulfill the obligations imposed upon them by this part and by such carrier.(c)Enforcement.—(1)Complaint.—Whenever the Secretary has reason to believe from a complaint or investigation that an agent providing household goods transportation services (including accessorial and terminal services) under the authority of a motor carrier providing transportation of household goods has violated section 14901(e) or 14912 or is consistently not fit, willing, and able to provide adequate household goods transportation services (including accessorial and terminal services), the Secretary may issue to such agent a complaint stating the charges and containing notice of the time and place of a hearing which shall be held no later than 60 days after service of the complaint to such agent.(2)Right to defend.—The agent shall have the right to appear at such hearing and rebut the charges contained in the complaint.(3)Order.—If the agent does not appear at the hearing or if the Secretary finds that the agent has violated section 14901(e) or 14912 or is consistently not fit, willing, and able to provide adequate household goods transportation services (including accessorial and terminal services), the Secretary may issue an order to compel compliance with the requirement that the agent be fit, willing, and able. Thereafter, the Secretary may issue an order to limit, condition, or prohibit such agent from any involvement in the transportation or provision of services incidental to the transportation of household goods if, after notice and an opportunity for a hearing, the Secretary finds that such agent, within a reasonable time after the date of issuance of a compliance order under this section, but in no event less than 30 days after such date of issuance, has willfully failed to comply with such order.(4)Hearing.—Upon filing of a petition with the Secretary by an agent who is the subject of an order issued pursuant to the second sentence of paragraph (3) of this subsection and after notice, a hearing shall be held with an opportunity to be heard. At such hearing, a determination shall be made whether the order issued pursuant to paragraph (3) of this subsection should be rescinded.(5)Court review.—Any agent adversely affected or aggrieved by an order of the Secretary issued under this subsection may seek relief in the appropriate United States court of appeals as provided by and in the manner prescribed in chapter 158 of title 28, United States Code.(d)Limitation on Applicability of Antitrust Laws.—(1)In general.—The antitrust laws, as defined in the first section of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12), do not apply to discussions or agreements between a motor carrier providing transportation of household goods and its agents (whether or not an agent is also a carrier) related solely to—(A) rates for the transportation of household goods under the authority of the principal carrier;(B) accessorial, terminal, storage, or other charges for services incidental to the transportation of household goods transported under the authority of the principal carrier;(C) allowances relating to transportation of household goods under the authority of the principal carrier; and(D) ownership of a motor carrier providing transportation of household goods by an agent or membership on the board of directors of any such motor carrier by an agent.(2)Board review.—The Board, upon its own initiative or request, shall review any activities undertaken under paragraph (1) and shall modify or terminate the activity if necessary to protect the public interest.(e)Definitions.—In this section, the following definitions apply:(1)Household goods.—The term “household goods” has the meaning such term had under section 10102(11) of this title, as in effect on December 31, 1995.(2)Transportation.—The term “transportation” means transportation that would be subject to the jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Commission under subchapter II of chapter 105 of this title, as in effect on December 31, 1995, if such subchapter were still in effect.(Added Pub. L. 104–88, title I, § 103, Dec. 29, 1995, 109 Stat. 887; amended Pub. L. 104–287, § 5(35), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3392.)Historical and Revision NotesPub. L. 104–287

This amends 49:13907(e)(1) and (2) for clarity and consistency.

Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Section 10102(11) of this title, referred to in subsec. (e)(1), was omitted and a new section 10102 enacted in the general amendment of this subtitle by Pub. L. 104–88, title I, § 102(a), Dec. 29, 1995, 109 Stat. 804, 806, effective Jan. 1, 1996.

Subchapter II of chapter 105 of this title, referred to in subsec. (e)(2), was omitted in the general amendment of this subtitle by Pub. L. 104–88, title I, § 102(a), Dec. 29, 1995, 109 Stat. 804, effective Jan. 1, 1996.

Prior Provisions

Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in section 10934 of this title prior to the general amendment of this subtitle by Pub. L. 104–88, § 102(a).

Amendments

1996—Subsec. (e)(1). Pub. L. 104–287, § 5(35)(A), substituted “December 31, 1995” for “the day before the effective date of this section”.

Subsec. (e)(2). Pub. L. 104–287, § 5(35)(B), substituted “December 31, 1995” for “the day before such effective date”.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective Jan. 1, 1996, except as otherwise provided in Pub. L. 104–88, see section 2 of Pub. L. 104–88, set out as a note under section 1301 of this title.

Abolition of Interstate Commerce Commission

Interstate Commerce Commission abolished by section 101 of Pub. L. 104–88, set out as a note under section 1301 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1998–2024 · leading case: Parramore v. Tru-Pak Moving Sys., Inc., 286 F. Supp. 2d 643 (M.D.N.C. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Parramore v. Tru-Pak Moving Sys., Inc., 286 F. Supp. 2d 643 (M.D.N.C. 2003). · cites it 4× “The statute clearly states that liability will extend to acts within the agent’s actual or apparent authority: Each motor carrier providing transportation of household goods shall be responsible for all acts or omissions of any of its agents which relate to the performance of…”
Chavis Van & Storage of Myrtle Beach, Inc. v. United Van Lines, LLC, 784 F.3d 1183 (8th Cir. 2015). “Instead, it argues that under the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (FAAA), 49 U.S.C. § 13907 (a), United is responsible for the acts and omissions of its agents; therefore, Chavis argues that United is liable for other United agents’ failure to appoint…”
Werner v. Lawrence Transp. Sys., Inc., 52 F. Supp. 2d 567 (E.D.N.C. 1998). · cites it 2× “Defendants first assert that they are improper parties pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 13907 (a) because they are agents of a disclosed principal, United Van Lines.”
Moore v. La Habra Relocations, Inc., 501 F. Supp. 2d 1278 (C.D. Cal. 2007). · cites it 2× “See 49 U.S.C. § 13907 (imposing liability on motor carrier, i.”
Nichols v. Mayflower Transit, LLC, 368 F. Supp. 2d 1104 (D. Nev. 2003). “49 U.S.C. § 13907 provides that: Each motor carrier providing transportation of household goods shall be responsible for all acts or omissions of any of its agents which relate to the performance of household goods transportation services (including accessorial or terminal…”
Marks v. Suddath Relocation Sys., Inc., 319 F. Supp. 2d 746 (S.D. Tex. 2004). “The federal statute that controls the bill of lading in question provides that Each motor carrier providing transportation of household goods shall be responsible for all acts or omissions of any of its agents which relate to the performance of household goods transportation…”
Ducham v. Reebie Allied Moving & Storage, Inc., 372 F. Supp. 2d 1076 (N.D. Ill. 2005). “) are now found at 49 U.S.C. § 13907 . 4 . Because so much of the caselaw in this area, including the bulk of the cases on which Reebie seeks to rely, predate the 1995 recodi-fication, this opinion employs the old Car-mack Amendment locution irrespective of whether cases…”
McLaughlin Transp. Sys., Inc. v. Rubinstein, 390 F. Supp. 2d 50 (D. Mass. 2005). “49 U.S.C. § 13907 (a) (emphasis added). Pursuant to the agreement between McLaughlin and Mayflower, all moves within a 450 mile distance of McLaughlin’s Nashua New Hampshire terminal, such as Rubinstein’s, 24 are carried out solely by McLaughlin.”
O'DONNELL v. Earle W. Noyes & Sons, 98 F. Supp. 2d 60 (D. Me. 2000). “Noyes also relies on 49 U.S.C. § 13907 , which provides, in relevant part: (a) Carriers responsible for agents.”
Oliver v. Atlas Van Lines, Inc., 504 F. Supp. 2d 1213 (N.D. Ala. 2007). “49 U.S.C. § 13907 (a). The defendants argue that, under this provision, Atlas is responsible for any acts or omissions of White’s in transporting Oliver’s household goods.”
Francione v. United Van Lines, LLC (W.D.N.Y. 2020). · cites it 4× “Suddath contends, therefore, that it has no liability to Plaintiffs since 49 U.S.C. § 13907 (a) “extinguishes an interstate motor carrier’s household goods agent’s liability where, as here, the agent’s acts or omissions ‘are within the actual or apparent authority of the agent…”
Frankowski v. Armstrong Transfer & Storage Co Inc (N.D. Ala. 2023). · cites it 3× “Armstrong and S&M Moving contend that the court should dismiss them as defendants because they were acting as United Van Lines’ agents and, under 49 U.S.C. § 13907 and common law, United Van Lines bears the sole liability for the acts of its “disclosed agents.”
Show all 19 citing cases →
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.