49 U.S.C. § 80111
Liability for delivery of goods
Historical and Revision Notes | ||
|---|---|---|
Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
80111(a) | 49 App.:90 (less last par.). | Aug. 29, 1916, ch. 415, §§ 10–12, 26, 39 Stat. 540, 542. |
80111(b) | 49 App.:90 (last par.). | |
80111(c) | 49 App.:91 (words after 2d comma). | |
| 49 App.:92 (words after 2d comma). | |
80111(d) | 49 App.:91 (words before 2d comma). | |
| 49 App.:92 (words before 2d comma). | |
| 49 App.:106. | |
In subsection (a), before clause (1), the word “title” is substituted for “right of property” for consistency in this chapter.
In subsection (c), the words “negotiable bill of lading” are substituted for “order bill . . . the negotiation of which would transfer the right to the possession of the goods” in 49 App.:91 for consistency in this chapter.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1997–2024 · leading case: Expeditors Int'l of Washington, Inc. v. Crowley Am. Transp., Inc., 117 F. Supp. 2d 663 (S.D. Ohio 2000).
Expeditors Int'l of Washington, Inc. v. Crowley Am. Transp., Inc., 117 F. Supp. 2d 663 (S.D. Ohio 2000). “This is a diversity action in which plaintiff asserts claims of breach of contract, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, promissory estoppel, negligence, fraudulent misrepresentation and concealment, conversion, breach of bailment and violation of the…”
PolyGram Grp. Distrib., Inc. v. Transus, Inc., 990 F. Supp. 1454 (N.D. Ga. 1997). “See 49 U.S.C.A. § 80111 (a) (1997). 13 . See Plaintiff's Exhibit 2 to Carver’s Dep.”
Union Pac. R.R. v. Beemac Trucking, LLC, 929 F. Supp. 2d 904 (D. Neb. 2013). “1997) (“Liability under both [the Carmack Amendment and the Federal Bills of Lading Act, 49 U.S.C. § 80111 (a),] ceases upon delivery of the goods to the proper person.”
Ace Bag & Burlap Co. v. Sea-Land Serv., Inc., 40 F. Supp. 2d 233 (D.N.J. 1999). “49 U.S.C. § 80111 (a)(1). Thus, “delivery to a person not entitled to the goods without production of the bill of lading is prima facie evidence of a conversion of the goods and a breach of contract.”
Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's v. CSX Transp., Inc. (S.D. Ill. 2022). “§ 80110 ); (3) Common carrier liability for violations of the Federal Bill of Lading Act (Mis- delivery/conversion under 49 U.S.C. § 80111 ); (4) Negligence, gross negligence, willful or wanton conduct; and, (5) Conversion (Id.”
Certain Underwriters Subscribing to a Policy of Ins. v. Guyana Nat'l Indus. Co. Inc. (S.D. Fla. 2024). “49 U.S.C. § 80111 (a). See also Polygram Group Distribution, Inc.”
Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's v. CSX Transp., Inc. (S.D. Ill. 2021). “§ 80110 ); (III) Common carrier liability for violations of the federal Bill of Lading Act (mis-delivery/conversion under 49 U.S.C. § 80111 ); (IV) Negligence, gross negligence, willful or wanton conduct; and, (V) Conversion.”
Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's v. CSX Transp., Inc. (S.D. Ill. 2021). “§ 80110 (non-delivery) and 49 U.S.C. § 80111 (misdelivery). A bill of lading records that a carrier has received goods from the party that wishes to ship them, states the terms of carriage, and serves as evidence of the contract for carriage.”
Hotung v. Cargo of a Crate Containing Nine Boxes of Documents Shipped Aboard the M/V Hanjin Nagoya, 452 F. Supp. 2d 564 (D.N.J. 2006). “49 U.S.C. § 80111 . Because plaintiff had no legal claim to the possession of the cargo at issue, the Court grants the intervenors’ motion to dismiss the first count for immediate possession of the cargo and the fourth count for conversion of the cargo.”
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.