Dynamic Transit Co. v. Trans Pacific Ventures, Inc.
Nevada Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
By the Court,
Parraguirre, J.:
In this opinion, we consider whether a shipper’s state-law claim for conversion is necessarily preempted by the Carmack Amendment’s federal liability limitation for interstate carriers, where the carrier was not authorized to take possession of the shipper’s property but did so for its own gain. Recognizing that the Carmack Amendment does not apply in cases of true conversion, we conclude that sufficient evidence supports the district court’s findings *758and award of damages. Thus, we affirm the district court’s judgment in respondents’ favor.
FACTS AND…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Richardson v. PeralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Adams Express Company v. CroningerSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Georgia, Florida & Alabama Railway Co. v. Blish Milling Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Old Aztec Mine, Inc. v. BrownNevada Supreme Court · 1981
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Certain Underwriters at Interest at Lloyds of London v. United Parcel Service of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2014
- Couturier v. American Invsco Corp.District Court, D. Nevada · 2014
- Howard v. HughesNevada Supreme Court · 2018
- Boyd Family Partnership v. RitterNevada Supreme Court · 2014
- HOWARD VS. HUGHESNevada Supreme Court · 2018
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.