Henslin

Henslin v. Roaasti Trucking Inc.

Good Law
69 F.3d 995·1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 31116·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8531
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 3, 1995Nos. 93-16469, 93-16891California1,447 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Kleinfeld, J.

The question in this ease is whether the exemption of agricultural commodities in the ICC statute regulating trucking eliminates federal question jurisdiction over truckers’ claims for unpaid shipping bills for agricultural commodities. We conclude that it does.

I. Facts.

Ms. Henslin owns a trucking company. She hauled onions, eanteloupes, carrots, and other produce for defendants. In all eases, the shipper or consignee paid the broker who hired Ms. Henslin, but the broker went out of business and did not pay her. She sued the shippers and consignees. The substantive question was whether they would get stuck paying twice, or she would get stuck hauling their produce and not getting paid. She, the shippers, and the consignees were innocent victims of the brokers’ business failures. Ms. Henslin’s claims were in various amounts, ranging from about $1,800 to $20,-000, adding up to about $22,000 total. Her jurisdictional basis for being in district court was federal question, not diversity. Her basis for federal question jurisdiction was that the charges were regulated by the ICC.

The district court granted summary judgment against Ms. Henslin’s claims for lack of federal question…

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.