Continental Ins Co v. Saia Motor Freight, No. 05-20907 (5th Cir. 2006)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT December 14, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk _______________________ No. 05-20907 _______________________ CONTINENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus SAIA MOTOR FREIGHT LINE, INC., Defendant-Appellant. __________________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas (USDC No. 4:03 CV 4350 EW) __________________________________________________________ Before REAVLEY, STEWART, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* SAIA Motor Freight Line, Inc. ( SAIA ), a freight carrier, appeals the district court s judgment following a bench trial, in which the district court awarded Plaintiff Continental Insurance Company ( Continental ) damages on its subrogation claim under the Carmack * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 Amendment, 49 U.S.C. § 14706. We affirm for the following reasons: 1. There is no jurisdictional defect in this case. This case was filed making a claim under federal law, and that alone is sufficient to empower the district court to assume jurisdiction. . . . Gonzalez v. S. Pac. Transp. Co., 773 F.2d 637, 645 (5th Cir. 1985) (quoting Romero v. Int l Terminal Operating Co., 358 U.S. 354, 359 (1959)). In its closing argument at trial, SAIA argued for the first time that the Carmack Amendment has no extraterritorial application, despite the fact that the joint pre-trial order stipulated that the Carmack Amendment governed the lawsuit. SAIA did not request an amendment of that order, and SAIA therefore waived the argument and did not preserve the issue for appeal. See Flannery v. Carroll, 676 F.2d 126, 129 (5th Cir. 1982). 2. There is no express waiver of Carmack Amendment liability under 49 U.S.C. § 14101(b) in the contract. The language in SAIA s tariff, which it argues is incorporated by reference into the contract of carriage, does not refer to the Carmack Amendment in any way. SAIA cites Kevin Bryant s deposition testimony, in which he appears to agree that SAIA s tariff was incorporated into the bill of lading and waived SAIA s liability for damage that occurred in Mexico, but this testimony is irrelevant to the construction of the contract, which is a matter of law. 3. The district court s factual findings regarding damages are not clearly erroneous. See Torch, Inc. v. Alesich, 148 F.3d 424, 426 (5th Cir. 1998) ( The factual findings of the trial court in a bench trial may not be set aside unless clearly erroneous and due regard must be given to its credibility evaluations. ) 2 AFFIRMED. 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
