Broken Bones and Damaged Legos: Lawsuit Over Faulty Charity Shipment Proceeds
A federal judge has granted an autism charity and an injured volunteer the chance to refine their case against a shipper, a freight broker and a container company over alleged injuries—including broken bones and two strokes—as well as damage that occurred because of a poorly packaged shipment of Legos.
November 28, 2017 at 01:19 PM
7 minute read
A federal judge has granted an autism charity and an injured volunteer the chance to refine their case against a shipper, a freight broker and a container company over alleged injuries—including broken bones and two strokes—as well as damage that occurred because of a poorly packaged shipment of Legos.
U.S. District Judge Gene E.K. Pratter of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted Donald J. Krauss and Fight Back for Autism's motion to file a second amended complaint against the defendant shipper, KV Load, which requested that the motion to file a second amended complaint be struck. Also sued were IRIS, a Wisconsin maker of plastic storage products, and C.H. Robinson Worldwide, a Delaware-based freight broker hired by IRIS to coordinate a shipment of Legos to Fight Back.
Krauss and Fight Back claimed that the defendants “failed to load the Legos in the safe manner that the charity had requested. Instead, they used old pallets of the wrong size and dangerously stacked the pallets on top of each other. The shoddy loading damaged the Legos in transit and caused a pallet to crack during unloading, injuring a volunteer for the charity,” according to Pratter's opinion.
As Krauss unloaded the shipment, a double-stacked pallet containing thousands of pounds of Legos “perched precariously on the edge of the trailer” collapsed and fell on him, Pratter said. According to the complaint, Krauss broke bones, lost a tooth, dislocated a knee cap, and suffered two strokes as a result of being crushed. Additionally, the charity lost money from damage done to the Legos.
The plaintiffs sued KV Load, IRIS and C.H. Robinson for negligence and breach of contract.
Pratter said Krauss' second amended complaint moots KV Load's request to strike. But the judge did address KV Load's argument that Krauss' state law personal injury claims were pre-empted by the Carmack Amendment.
The amendment lays out federal law regulating motor carriers and provides that ”liability imposed … is for the actual loss or injury to the property” caused by carriers. For the sake of uniformity, it pre-empts state laws governing motor carriers.
KV Load argued that the amendment was not limited to claims for property damage but extended also to personal injury claims.
Pratter said circuit courts around the country are split as to whether to follow the “conduct theory”—which states that claims can only escape pre-emption if they are related to conduct separate from the delivery, loss of or damage to goods—or the “harm theory,” which states that personal injury claims are pre-empted if they are related to harms that are distinct from the loss of, or the damage to, goods.
Pratter elected to adopt the conduct theory, noting consistent rulings by other districts within the Third Circuit that have done the same, and agreed with KV Load that, in this case, the state law claims were pre-empted.
“In this case, KV Load's conduct was allegedly substandard: The cargo was loaded improperly, damaged in transit, and damaged during the unloading process. KV Load's conduct that damaged the cargo completely becomes the conduct that injured Mr. Krauss. The state law claims against KV Load are therefore dismissed as pre-empted,” Pratter said.
Wayne attorney David G. Concannon, who represents the plaintiffs, and KV Load's lawyer, Marc I. Kunkin of Hill Rivkins in New York, did not respond to requests for comment.
A federal judge has granted an autism charity and an injured volunteer the chance to refine their case against a shipper, a freight broker and a container company over alleged injuries—including broken bones and two strokes—as well as damage that occurred because of a poorly packaged shipment of Legos.
U.S. District Judge
Krauss and Fight Back claimed that the defendants “failed to load the Legos in the safe manner that the charity had requested. Instead, they used old pallets of the wrong size and dangerously stacked the pallets on top of each other. The shoddy loading damaged the Legos in transit and caused a pallet to crack during unloading, injuring a volunteer for the charity,” according to Pratter's opinion.
As Krauss unloaded the shipment, a double-stacked pallet containing thousands of pounds of Legos “perched precariously on the edge of the trailer” collapsed and fell on him, Pratter said. According to the complaint, Krauss broke bones, lost a tooth, dislocated a knee cap, and suffered two strokes as a result of being crushed. Additionally, the charity lost money from damage done to the Legos.
The plaintiffs sued KV Load, IRIS and C.H. Robinson for negligence and breach of contract.
Pratter said Krauss' second amended complaint moots KV Load's request to strike. But the judge did address KV Load's argument that Krauss' state law personal injury claims were pre-empted by the Carmack Amendment.
The amendment lays out federal law regulating motor carriers and provides that ”liability imposed … is for the actual loss or injury to the property” caused by carriers. For the sake of uniformity, it pre-empts state laws governing motor carriers.
KV Load argued that the amendment was not limited to claims for property damage but extended also to personal injury claims.
Pratter said circuit courts around the country are split as to whether to follow the “conduct theory”—which states that claims can only escape pre-emption if they are related to conduct separate from the delivery, loss of or damage to goods—or the “harm theory,” which states that personal injury claims are pre-empted if they are related to harms that are distinct from the loss of, or the damage to, goods.
Pratter elected to adopt the conduct theory, noting consistent rulings by other districts within the Third Circuit that have done the same, and agreed with KV Load that, in this case, the state law claims were pre-empted.
“In this case, KV Load's conduct was allegedly substandard: The cargo was loaded improperly, damaged in transit, and damaged during the unloading process. KV Load's conduct that damaged the cargo completely becomes the conduct that injured Mr. Krauss. The state law claims against KV Load are therefore dismissed as pre-empted,” Pratter said.
Wayne attorney David G. Concannon, who represents the plaintiffs, and KV Load's lawyer, Marc I. Kunkin of Hill Rivkins in
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPhila. Med Mal Lawyers In for Busy Year as Court Adjusts for Filing Boom
3 minute readPhila. Jury Hits Sig Sauer With $11M Verdict Over Alleged Gun Defect
3 minute readPhila. Attorney Hit With 5-Year Suspension for Mismanaging Firm and Mishandling Cases
4 minute readEx-DLA Piper, Ballard Spahr Atty Accused of Aiding Video Game Company Founder's Misappropriation Scheme
5 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250