Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-00505/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-00505-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 380
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Property Damage
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY

COMPANY OF AMERICA and

TOMOTHERAPY INCORPORATED,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

LEGACY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES,

INC. and DOES 1-10, inclusive,

Defendants.

 /

No. C 10-00505 JSW

AMENDED ORDER GRANTING

UNITED’S MOTION TO DISMISS

WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

Now before the Court is the motion to dismiss filed by third-party defendant United Van

Lines, LLC (“United”). The Court finds that this matter is suitable for disposition without oral

argument and accordingly VACATES the hearing date of April 30, 2010. See N.D. Civ. L.R. 7-

1(b). Having carefully reviewed the parties’ papers and considered their arguments and the

relevant legal authority, and good cause appearing, the Court hereby GRANTS United’s motion

to dismiss with leave to amend.

Plaintiffs originally filed a complaint for breach of contract, negligence, and breach of

bailment against defendant Legacy Transportation Services, Inc. (“Defendant Legacy”) in the

Superior Court for the County of Contra Costa. Thereafter, Defendant removed the state action

to this Court on the basis of the preemptive effect of the Carmack Amendment to the Interstate

Commerce Act, 49 U.S.C. § 14706 (“the Carmack Amendment”), which governs contracts

claims concerning the transportation of goods in interstate commerce. 

Case 3:10-cv-00505-JSW Document 36 Filed 05/03/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Following removal to this Court, third-party defendant Legacy filed a complaint for

equitable indemnity and contribution, express contractual indemnity, apportionment, and

declaratory relief based on the vicarious and passive nature of Legacy’s conduct.

Thereafter, Plaintiffs moved this Court to remand the claims to state court of the basis

that removal was improper on the face of the complaint. However, on April 13, 2010, the Court

denied Plaintiffs’ motion to remand and held that because “the Carmack Amendment is the

exclusive cause of action for contract claims alleging delay, loss, failure to deliver or damage to

property,” Plaintiffs’ state law claims were completely preempted and were, accordingly,

dismissed. (See Order at 6 (citing Hall v. North American Van Lines, Inc., 476 F.3d 683, 688-

89 (9th Cir. 2007) (citing Moffit v. Bekins Van Lines Co., 6 F.3d 305, 306-07 (5th Cir. 1993))). 

The Court allowed Plaintiffs to file an amended complaint by no later than April 30, 2010. The

Court further ordered that if an amended complaint is filed, Defendant should either file an

answer or move to dismiss within twenty days of service of the amended complaint and if

Plaintiffs do not file an amended complaint, the Court would dismiss the action without

prejudice. 

Because the claims upon which the third-party claim for indemnity is based have been

dismissed and there is currently no operative claims upon which to seek indemnity, the Court

GRANTS United’s motion to dismiss the current third-party complaint with leave to amend. 

Should Plaintiff file an amended complaint under the Carmack Amendment, and should

Defendant Legacy Transportation Services, Inc. seek indemnification in an amended third-party

complaint, a motion to dismiss that third-party complaint would, thereafter, be ripe. The current

motion addresses an indemnification claim against an inoperative complaint. Therefore,

Defendant United’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED and Legacy’s current third-party

complaint is DISMISSED with leave to amend.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 3, 2010 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:10-cv-00505-JSW Document 36 Filed 05/03/10 Page 2 of 2