Hoffman v. Dorlan Crane, Ill. State Motor Serv., Inc.
| Decision Date | 03 June 2014 |
| Docket Number | No. 1-12-2793,No. 1-12-2854,1-12-2793,1-12-2854 |
| Citation | 2014 IL App (1st) 122793 |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
| Parties | NANCY HOFFMAN and MARK HOFFMAN, Individually and as Parent and Next Friend of KAREN HOFFMAN, a Minor Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. DORLAN CRANE, ILLINOIS STATE MOTOR SERVICE, INC., an Illinois Corporation, and JOSEPH T. RYERSON & SON, INC., d/b/a RYERSON TULL COIL PROCESSING DIVISION, Defendants-Appellants (3pL Corp., Defendant). |
NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).
Appeal from the
Circuit Court of
Cook County
Honorable
Patrick F. Lustig
¶ 1 Held: Plaintiffs presented evidence sufficient to demonstrate that Crane was an agent of Ryerson and acting within the scope of that agency when the accident occurred and that the jury's verdict and answers to the special interrogatories are not against the manifest weight of the evidence thereby precluding Ryerson's motion for judgment n.o.v. The court did not err by denying the posttrial motion for a new trial jointly filed by Crane and Illinois State because Illinois State admitted that Crane was acting as its agent when theaccident occurred and, in addition, the high/low agreement between plaintiffs and 3pL did not affect Illinois State's liability as plaintiffs were not seeking to hold Illinois State vicariously liable for injuries caused by 3pL's conduct. Ryerson forfeited its claim that it was entitled to contribution from Illinois State because Crane's negligence was attributable to Illinois State by failing to raise that argument in a posttrial motion. The jury's award to Karen Hoffman for pain and suffering was not excessive because it is supported by the evidence presented at trial.
¶ 2 Defendants, Dorlan Crane, Illinois State Motor Service, Inc. (Illinois State), and Joseph T. Ryerson & Son Inc. (Ryerson), appeal from orders of the Circuit Court of Cook County entering judgment against them and in favor of plaintiffs, Nancy Hoffman, Mark Hoffman, and Karen Hoffman, and denying their posttrial motions. On appeal, Ryerson contends that the court erred by denying its motion for judgment n.o.v. or a new trial and dismissing its counterclaim for contribution against Crane and Illinois State and that the amount of damages awarded to Karen Hoffman for pain and suffering was excessive. Crane and Illinois State contend that this court should reverse the judgment entered against them because Illinois State was engaged in a joint venture with 3pL Corp. (3pL) and Illinois State's liability was extinguished when 3pL reached a high/low agreement with plaintiffs releasing it from liability. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
¶ 4 On July 12, 2002, plaintiffs filed a complaint against Crane and Illinois State with regard to a vehicular accident that occurred on June 21, 2002, in Cedar County, Iowa, involving a semi tractor-trailer driven by Crane and an automobile driven by Nancy Hoffman in which her daughter, Karen, was riding as a passenger. Plaintiffs alleged that Crane was acting as an agent of Illinois State, a trucking company, at the time of the accident. On June 30, 2003, plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint in which they added Ryerson, a producer of steel coils whose product was being hauled by Crane at the time of the accident, as a defendant and alleged thatCrane was acting as an agent of Ryerson when the accident occurred.
¶ 5 Ryerson filed a counterclaim against Crane and Illinois State under the Joint Tortfeasor Contribution Act (740 ILCS 100/0.01 et seq. (West 2004)), alleging that Crane was negligent in his maintenance and operation of the tractor-trailer and that Illinois State failed to properly train Crane, negligently hired Crane, failed to properly maintain the tractor-trailer, and was otherwise careless and negligent. Ryerson asserted that, in the event it was required to pay more than its pro rata share of any common liability to plaintiffs, it was entitled to contribution from Crane and Illinois State for any amount in excess of its pro rata share.
¶ 6 On December 27, 2011, plaintiffs filed a four-count sixth amended complaint. In count one Nancy and Karen Hoffman alleged a negligence claim against Illinois State by and through its agent, Crane and, in count two, Mark Hoffman alleged a loss of consortium claim against Illinois State. In counts three and four plaintiffs alleged those same claims against Illinois State, 3pL, and Ryerson, asserting that they were engaged in a joint venture and that Crane was acting as their agent at the time of the accident. On January 12, 2012, Crane and Illinois State filed an answer and affirmative defenses to the sixth amended complaint in which they admitted that Crane was acting as an agent of Illinois State when the accident occurred; that Ryerson, 3pL, and Illinois State were engaged in a joint venture; and that Crane was acting as an agent of Illinois State, 3pL, and Ryerson.
¶ 7 The evidence presented at trial established that the accident occurred while Crane was driving home after having delivered steel coils from Ryerson's facility in Chicago to a customer located in Amana, Iowa, and was caused by Crane's failure to maintain control of his tractor-trailer. The evidence also established that: 1) 3pL, a freight brokerage company, provided Ryerson with motor carrier transportation services pursuant to a property brokerage agreement; 2) Illinois State provided 3pL with transportation services pursuant to a transportation agreement; and 3) Crane made deliveries for Illinois State pursuant to an independent contractor agreement.
¶ 8 The record includes the property brokerage agreement between Ryerson and 3pL, which was signed by Gary Alvord, the president of 3pL, and Kyle Chown, a vice president of Ryerson, and under which 3pL agreed to provide Ryerson with motor carrier transportation services as an independent contractor. 3pL agreed to provide Ryerson with various services, such as electronic upload of orders and route optimization, assignment of carriers, daily transmission of data and bill of lading information, notification of carrier pickup and delivery, proof of delivery, carrier rate negotiation, payment to carrier, and management of a network of service carriers. 3pL had exclusive control over the manner in which its employees and/or subcontractors performed those services, could employ or subcontract with individuals or carriers as it deemed necessary, took full responsibility for the acts and omissions of its subcontractors, and retained sole authority to discharge, discipline, and control its employees and subcontractors. Ryerson, however, retained the right to disallow a carrier "based on carrier non-performance including but not limited to late deliveries, services failures, excessive freight claims, or customer complaints." In exchange, Ryerson agreed to pay 3pL a fixed weekly fee and the parties agreed that, if circumstances arose which significantly impacted the volume of services provided by 3pL, either party could request an adjustment to the fee. In addition, Ryerson agreed to pay 3pL 25% of all savings in excess of$1,000,000 generated by 3pL's transportation services pursuant to a gain share formula set forth in the agreement.
¶ 9 The transportation agreement between 3pL and Illinois State, which was signed by Peter Dugan, a vice president of 3pL, and Charles Sawall, the president of Illinois State, provided that Illinois State would supply 3pL with accurate delivery information and abide by any rules and regulations set forth by 3pL's customers. In exchange, 3pL agreed to pay Illinois State pursuant to a rate schedule attached to the agreement. Illinois State agreed to furnish all the equipment necessary to perform its obligations, pay all expenses associated with the use and operation of such equipment, keep the equipment in good repair, and only use competent and legally licensed personnel. Illinois State maintained full control over its personnel and agreed to operate as an independent contractor of 3pL. The agreement also provided that, in the event Illinois State violated the terms of the agreement or the rules of engagement outlined in 3pL's carrier manual, 3pL reserved the right to alter payment terms and reduce the number of loads tendered to Illinois State.
¶ 10 Sawall signed a document acknowledging that he had reviewed a copy of 3pL's carrier manual with a 3pL representative and accepted the conditions set forth therein. In the manual, 3pL laid out specific working requirements, including expectations regarding professionalism and carrier management, continuous improvement, safety, dispatch, rate, and billing processes. Regarding professionalism, 3pL required that all drivers maintain a well-kept appearance and perform their duties in a safe, courteous, and professional manner. As to carrier management, 3pL would issue a nonconformance notice for any incident which disrupted service, including amissed load, a lack of communication between the carrier and 3pL regarding a late delivery, or a driver's disruptive behavior while at Ryerson's facility or in front of a customer. The manual included safety requirements that drivers were required to follow while at Ryerson's facility and set forth various "rules of engagement," including that 3pL would provide the carrier with a load number that must be presented to Ryerson upon arrival at its facility and that the carrier must notify 3pL if it cannot meet a pickup time or delivery time, notify 3pL if any delays arise during delivery, provide 3pL with delivery information within two hours of the appointed delivery time, and comply with the safety requirements while at Ryerson's facility.
¶ 11 The independent contractor agreement...
To continue reading
Request your trial