Motorola, Inc. v. Federal Express Corp.
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
308 F.3d 995 (2002)
- Written by Tom Squier, JD
Facts
Motorola, Inc. (plaintiff) hired Kuehne & Nagel, Inc. (K&N) (defendant) to ship a cellular-telephone base station from Texas to Japan. K&N was an indirect air carrier, which forwards freight to and from an actual operator of an aircraft, and in this instance, it hired Federal Express (FedEx) to perform the air transportation. When K&N transferred the goods to FedEx, the goods were packaged in crates, and K&N noted that the crates were undamaged. When the shipments arrived in Japan, K&N noted that some of the goods were damaged. Upon delivery of the goods, Motorola discovered that a control frame for the base station was damaged. The control frame was an integral part of the base station, and the base station could neither be installed nor operate. The damaged portion of the shipment weighed 680 kilograms, while the entire shipment weighed 12,204 kilograms. Motorola had to replace the control frame, which delayed installation of the base station by six weeks and cost $439,330.70. Motorola and its insurer sued K&N and FedEx for breach of contract and negligence. Although K&N argued at trial that its liability should be limited under the Warsaw Convention based on the weight of only the damaged crate, the trial court ultimately awarded damages to Motorola by calculating the liability limit using the weight of the entire shipment. K&N appealed. The trial court also awarded prejudgment interest to Motorola.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fisher, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
