Schultz v. Auld

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the Carmack Amendment preempts state claims for recovery for goods which have been lost or damaged during shipment
• holding that the Carmack Amendment preempts claim under the Idaho Consumer Protection Act
• calling Brown “clearly inconsistent with decisions of the United States Supreme Court and the federal circuits to have directly addressed the issue”
• stating, “Virtually every circuit to address this issue has held that the Carmack Amendment preempts state law remedies for loss or damage to goods shipped by common carriers.”
• shipper alleged that carrier's representations about liability coverage were fraudulent and violated state consumer practices statute
• “Decisions more recent than those on which Plaintiff relies have uniformly upheld the preemptive effect of the Car-mack Amendment and that the application of a state’s deceptive trade practices act is totally incongruous with the purposes of the Carmack Amendment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).