Court Opinion

ID: 9724347
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 10:53:45.161714+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:24:59.559046
License: Public Domain

CRIPPEN, Judge
(concurring specially).
Except on the determination that respondent Tucker Company had a contract carrier relationship with United Shipping Company, Inc., I join in the opinion of the majority. Because we determined that Tucker Company was a broker which did not agree to be liable for unpaid freight costs, my concurrence extends to all results stated by the majority.
I am not satisfied, however, that United Shipping had a contract carrier relationship with Tucker Company under 49 U.S.C. § 10102(15)(B). Even with the use of liberal standards to determine contract carrier status, it is my opinion that United Shipping and Tucker Company had a loose arrangement here which meant little to either party in the absence of additional contracts for specific carriage services.