Raineri v. N. Am. Van Lines, Inc.

• Decision Date: 28 August 2012
• Docket Number: Civil Action No. 11–4235 (MLC).
• Citation: 906 F.Supp.2d 334
• Parties: Sharira RAINERI, Plaintiff, v. NORTH AMERICAN VAN LINES, INC., Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey

906 F.Supp.2d 334

Sharira RAINERI, Plaintiff,

v.NORTH AMERICAN VAN LINES, INC., Defendant.

Civil Action No. 11–4235 (MLC).

United States District Court, D. New Jersey.

Aug. 28, 2012.

Alex Lyubarsky, Wilentz Goldman & Spitzer, PA, Woodbridge, Barry A. Cooke, Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, PA, Eatontown, NJ, for Plaintiff.

Donna Marie Russo, Chatham, NJ, for Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

COOPER, District Judge.

The plaintiff, Sharira Raineri, originally brought this action in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Monmouth County. (Dkt. entry no. 1, Rmv. Not., Ex. A, Compl.) The defendants properly removed the action to this Court. (Rmv. Not.) ¹

Raineri thereafter filed the Amended Complaint, raising two counts against NAVL that generally relate to services that NAVL provided to Raineri. (Dkt. entry no. 15, Am. Compl.) Raineri brings the first count of the Amended Complaint (“First Count”) under New Jersey law, alleging that NAVL caused damage to her Freehold, New Jersey property and, further, caused Raineri to delay the sale of and “make financial concessions” to the purchasers of that property. ( See id. at ¶ 19.) She brings the second count of the Amended Complaint (“Second Count”) under the Carmack Amendment to the Interstate Commerce Act, 49 U.S.C. § 14706, et seq. (“the Carmack Amendment”), alleging that NAVL lost and damaged several household goods when moving Raineri's belongings from her Freehold, New Jersey and Forked River, New Jersey properties to her new residence in California. ( See id. at ¶¶ 4, 13.)

NAVL now moves for summary judgment in its favor and against Raineri on all claims asserted against it, arguing that: (1) the First Count is preempted by the Carmack Amendment; and Raineri is precluded from raising the Second Count because she has failed to satisfy conditions precedent to recovery, pursuant to either her contract with NAVL or the federal regulations under the Carmack Amendment. ( See dkt. entry no. 16, Mot.; see also dkt. entry no. 16–5, NAVL Br.) ² Raineri opposes the Motion, arguing that: (1) the First Count is not subject to preemption; and (2) she may seek relief in the Second Count because her e-mails satisfied the conditions cited by NAVL. ( See generally dkt. entry no. 17, Raineri Opp'n Br.)

The Court will resolve the Motion without oral argument pursuant to Local Civil Rule 78.1(b). We will, for the reasons that follow, grant the Motion.

I. BACKGROUND³A. NAVL Failed to Timely Pack and Load Raineri's Belongings in New Jersey

Raineri contracted with NAVL and Apollo to move her belongings from her two New Jersey properties to San Clemente, California. ( See dkt. entry no. 16–3, Marlowe Aff., Ex. D, Order for Service; see also id., Ex. F, Cost Estimate.) The Order for Service provided that NAVL's agents (“the movers”) would pack Raineri's belongings on June 21 and 22, 2010, load them into moving trucks on June 23, 2010, and deliver them in California in early July. ( See Cost Estimate at 1–4.) The movers began loading Raineri's belongings on June 23, 2010, but did not complete loading until June 27, 2010. ( See dkt. entry no. 16–4, Daler Aff., Ex. O, 6–28–10 E-mail from Raineri to Pease; see also Daler Aff., Ex. S, 6–30–10 E-mail from Raineri to Pease.)

Raineri now seeks both direct and consequential damages as a result of the movers' actions. Some of those damages relate to alleged losses of and damage to her belongings. ( See Am. Compl. at ¶¶ 7, 10, 20–34.) Others relate to financial concessions that Raineri made as a result of the movers' conduct. ( See id. at ¶¶ 4–5, 17–19.) Those concessions included $200 given to a cleaning service to remove “half-eaten sandwiches ... water bottles, and used tape rolls ... left all over the house” by the movers, and $6,000 given to the purchasers of Raineri's Freehold, New Jersey property as a result of the damages that the movers allegedly caused to and the delay of the sale of that property. ( See 6–30–10 E-mail from Raineri to Pease.)

Raineri signed a bill of lading after the movers loaded a portion of her belongings on June 24, 2010. (NAVL SOF at ¶¶ 8–9; Raineri Resp. to NAVL SOF at ¶¶ 8–9; see also Marlowe Aff., Ex. H, Bill of Lading.) ⁴ The Bill of Lading, inter alia, sets forth the procedures for filing claims for loss and damage. It states:

As a condition precedent to recovery, a claim for any loss or damage, injury or delay must be filed in writing with carrier within nine (9) months after delivery to consignee as shown on face hereof, or in case of failure to make delivery, then within nine (9) months after a reasonable time for delivery has elapsed; and suit must be instituted against carrier within two (2) years and one (1) day from the date when notice in writing is given by carrier to the claimant that carrier has disallowed the claim or any parts of parts thereof specified in the notice. Where a claim is not filed or suit is not instituted thereon in accordance with the foregoing provisions, carrier shall not be liable and such claim will not be paid.

(Bill of Lading at Section 6 (emphasis added).)

The Bill of Lading incorporates by reference the terms of NAVL's Professional Relocation Tariff (“Tariff”). (NAVL SOF at ¶ 11; Raineri Resp. to NAVL SOF at ¶ 11.) The Tariff contains substantially the same language as that found in Section 6 of the Bill of Lading, quoted above. (Marlowe Aff., Ex. C, Tariff at Item 104, Section 6.) ⁵ The Tariff also provides, in relevant part:

1. Notice of Claims Required—A claim for loss, damage, injury, or delay shall not be voluntarily paid by [NAVL] unless filed electronically via [NAVL]'s website, or in writing as provided in paragraph 2 below, within the specified time limits applicable thereto and as otherwise may be required by law, by the terms of the bill of lading and/or other contract of carriage, and by all tariff provisions applicable thereto.

2. Minimum Filing Requirements—A communication [filed] electronically via [NAVL]'s website, or in writing from a claimant filed with [NAVL] within the time limits specified in the bill of lading or contract of carriage or transportation, and

(a) containing facts sufficient to identify the shipment(s) of property involved;

(b) asserting liability for alleged loss, damage, injury; and

(c) making claim for the payment of a specified or determinable amount of money,

shall be considered as sufficient compliance with the provisions for filing claims embraced in the bill of lading or other contract of carriage.

( Id. at Item 302, ¶¶ 1–2 (emphasized headings in original).)

B. The Movers Failed to Timely Deliver Raineri's Belongings to Raineri's Residence in California

Raineri flew to California on June 26, 2010. ( See 6–30–10 E-mail from Raineri to Pease.) She thereafter e-mailed Vicki Pease, an NAVL customer service representative, informing Pease of the earlier service issues and urging Pease to ensure that her belongings timely arrived in California by July 3, 2010. ( See 6–28–10 E-mail from Raineri to Pease.) Pease responded to Raineri's e-mail and explained that Raineri, if seeking damages related to delays, would have to formally submit an NAVL claim form and receipts to support her claims. ( See Daler Aff., Ex. R, 6–29–10 E-mail from Pease to Raineri.)

Raineri sent Pease another e-mail on June 30, 2010, complaining again of the movers' earlier service failures, and alleging that she was informed she would not timely receive her belongings in California. ( See 6–30–10 E-mail from Raineri to Pease.) Raineri asked Pease to address the situation and ensure timely delivery. ( See id.) Raineri now acknowledges that this e-mail did not contain the NAVL claim form or the receipts that Pease earlier requested. (NAVL SOF at ¶ 20; Raineri Resp. to NAVL SOF at ¶ 20.)

The movers did not complete delivery of Raineri's belongings until July 18, 2010. ( See Bill of Lading.) Raineri acknowledged final delivery by again signing the Bill of Lading. ( See id.; see also NAVL SOF at ¶ 15; Raineri Resp. to NAVL SOF at ¶ 15.)

C. Raineri Contacted NAVL and Attempted to Seek Reimbursement for Items Damaged During the Move

Raineri, on July 22, 2010, sent an e-mail to Ruth Daler, a customer service representative for NAVL, informing Daler that she wished to suspend payment for the NAVL's services because the shipments to California were late, incomplete, and, to the extent that they were delivered, damaged. (Daler Aff., Ex. T, 7–22–10 E-mail from Raineri to Daler.) Raineri, inter alia, explained that many of her belongings were missing; that she, as a result of the missing belongings, had purchased replacement “essential ‘need to live’ items”; and that the movers “smashed a medicine cabinet”. ( Id.) Raineri also requested that Daler provide “instructions for ... getting reimbursed for essentials, and for filing a claim for lost and damaged items.” ( Id.)

Daler responded by e-mail on July 26, 2010, providing instructions on submitting claims arising from late delivery and advising Raineri that another NAVL representative would provide instructions on submitting claims for loss and damage. (Daler Aff., Ex. U, 7–26–10 E-mail from Daler to Raineri.) Sandy Marlowe, NAVL's Lead Claim Services Representative, thereafter sent Raineri an e-mail with instructions for filing claims for loss and damage. (Marlowe Aff. at ¶ 25; see also id., Ex. I, 7–26–10 E-mail from Marlowe to Raineri.)

Nearly six weeks lapsed before Raineri next contacted NAVL when, on September 9, 2010, she sent Daler another e-mail. (Daler Aff., Ex. V, 9–9–10 E-mail from Raineri to Daler.) Raineri stated in that e-mail that her “king size bed headboard was cracked in half, the washer was broken (and had to be trashed) and [her] grill was in three pieces.” ( Id.) She also stated that some of her belongings, following the move, had “an odor ... that [she] can't get rid of” and that she had not yet received most of her kitchen items, her ladder, and most of her tools. ( Id.)

Raineri, in that e-mail, also...