Dolan v. Sea Transfer Corp.
New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division
942 A.2d 29 (2008)
- Written by Steven Pacht, JD
Facts
New Jersey resident Paul Dolan (plaintiff) worked in New York. Dolan was injured in New Jersey when his car hit a cargo container that had fallen off a tractor-trailer. Sea Transfer Corporation (Sea) (defendant) owned the tractor-trailer’s cab and employed the tractor-trailer’s driver. New Jersey-based Hapag-Lloyd AG (H-L) (defendant) owned the container. The accident occurred while Sea was transporting H-L’s cargo from Staten Island, New York, to the Bronx, New York. The most direct route between Staten Island and the Bronx did not involve travelling through New Jersey, but Sea instructed its driver to go through New Jersey to avoid traffic. Dolan and his wife, Kathleen Dolan (plaintiff), sued H-L, Sea, and others in New Jersey state court. H-L argued that New Jersey law applied and that it could not be held liable under New Jersey law for the negligence of Sea’s driver. The Dolans responded that New York law imposed liability on H-L for Sea’s driver’s negligence and that New York law applied because the core negligence underlying the accident occurred in Staten Island, where the driver (1) failed to secure the container to the truck chassis, (2) departed despite knowing that two chassis locking pins were not properly inserted, and (3) elected to skip a voluntary predeparture roadability inspection. The trial court ruled that New York law applied. The jury ultimately issued a substantial verdict against H-L. H-L appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Reisner, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.