Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Primary Industries Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “Primary Coal has neither provided evidence of its reasonable diligence nor demonstrated why these damages were impossible to assess during the nine- month period.”
• common law contract and tort claims preempted where the claims “seek damages flowing from shipment agreements with Conrail,” because “[t]he Carmack Amendment governs the parties’ rights and liabilities under this situation[]”
• claims of gross negligence, fraud and intentional torts preempted
• carrier’s letters to shipper denying liability did not warrant estoppel

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).