White

White v. Mayflower Transit, LLC

Good Law
481 F. Supp. 2d 1105·2007 WL 926967
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMarch 19, 2007CV 06 6710 CAS PLAXCalifornia1,849 words

Opinion

Opinion

Snyder, J.

Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS): DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT (filed March 7, 2007)

The Court finds this motion appropriate for decision without oral argument. Fed. R.Civ.P. 78; Local Rule 7-15. Accordingly, the hearing date of April 2, 2007, is hereby vacated and the matter is taken under submission.

I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

The instant case arises out of an agreement between plaintiff and defendant whereby defendant agreed to ship personal items belonging to plaintiff from New York to Los Angeles., On July 27, 2006, plaintiff filed a complaint against defendant alleging claims for: (1) contractual fraud, (2) insurance coverage, (3) general negligence, (4) property damage, and (5) intentional infliction of emotional distress. On October 20, 2006, defendant removed the action to this Court on the grounds that plaintiffs claim is one for damages for injury to goods transported by a common carrier interstate, which is exclusively governed by federal law pursuant to the Car-mack Amendment, 49 U.S.C. § 14706 .

On November 20, 2006, the Court denied plaintiffs motion to remand on the grounds that one or more of plaintiffs claims are completely…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.