You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Banton v. Schroeder Moving Systems, Inc.

Citations: 827 F. Supp. 1390; 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11468; 1993 WL 316041Docket: Civ. A. No. 91-C-206

Court: District Court, E.D. Wisconsin; May 19, 1993; Federal District Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this case, United Van Lines filed for summary judgment against Susan Banton following a dispute over tariff charges for the transport of household goods. The initial declaratory judgment action was initiated by James Banton against Schroeder Moving Systems, with United Van Lines intervening and asserting that the Bantons were jointly and severally liable for the charges. The undisputed facts established that United Van Lines and Schroeder, operating under the Interstate Commerce Act, transported the Bantons' goods from Alabama to Wisconsin, with a bill of lading identifying James Banton as both shipper and consignee and bearing Susan Banton's signature. The Interstate Commerce Commission Household Goods Tariff mandates joint and several liability for unpaid charges. The court ruled that the terms of the bill of lading govern the case, confirming that the consignee is liable for transportation charges, regardless of prior arrangements with third parties. Citing relevant case law, the court held Susan Banton liable for the charges and granted summary judgment against her for $15,635.25, plus costs, with a joint and several liability judgment also entered against both James and Susan Banton.

Legal Issues Addressed

Enforceability of Bill of Lading Terms

Application: The court upheld the enforceability of the bill of lading terms, which stated that the owners of the goods or service beneficiaries are primarily responsible for payment, irrespective of any agreements with third parties.

Reasoning: The bill of lading stipulates that the owners of the goods or service beneficiaries are primarily responsible for payment, irrespective of any agreements with third parties.

Joint and Several Liability under Interstate Commerce Commission Tariff

Application: The court applied the principle that both the shipper and consignee are jointly and severally liable for unpaid tariff charges as stipulated by the Interstate Commerce Commission Household Goods Tariff.

Reasoning: Under the Interstate Commerce Commission Household Goods Tariff, both the shipper and consignee are jointly and severally liable for unpaid charges, indicating that any credit extended does not relieve the other party of payment responsibility.

Liability of Consignee for Transportation Charges

Application: The court confirmed the liability of the consignee for transportation charges, regardless of prior arrangements with other parties, based on established case law and statutory provisions.

Reasoning: The law confirms that the consignee is liable for transportation charges, regardless of previous arrangements.

Summary Judgment in Tariff Disputes

Application: Summary judgment was granted against Susan Banton based on the undisputed facts that she executed the bill of lading and requested additional services, establishing her liability for the charges.

Reasoning: Consequently, Susan Banton is held liable for the shipping charges, leading to the order for summary judgment against her in the amount of $15,635.25, plus costs.