Jones Truck Lines, Inc. v. Iversen Baking Co.

2 Citing cases

  1. Jones Truck Lines, Inc. v. WD40 Co.

    170 B.R. 1004 (W.D. Ark. 1994)   Cited 1 times

    Defendant is represented by the same counsel who have handled a number of the Jones undercharge cases pending before this court. For that reason, counsel is aware that this court in a memorandum opinion issued on October 13, 1993, in Jones Truck Lines, Inc. v. Iversen Baking Company, 837 F.Supp. 290 (W.D.Ark.1993) had previously refused to "refer" the issue of contract versus common carriage to the ICC. On this point, the court is referred to section 8 of the Negotiated Rates Act of 1993 (NRA), Pub.L. No. 103-180, 107 Stat. 2044 (1993).

  2. Jones Truck Lines, Inc. v. Scott Fetzer

    860 F. Supp. 1370 (E.D. Ark. 1994)   Cited 3 times

    However, the Court recognizes that there is a split among courts regarding the application of the doctrine of primary jurisdiction in determining contract versus common carriage. Reported cases taking the opposite position include: Jones Truck Lines, Inc. v. Iversen Baking Co., 837 F. Supp. 290 (W.D.Ark. 1993); Brizendine v. Reliable Corp., 152 B.R. 224 (N.D.Ill. 1993); and Security Serv., Inc. v. Johnson Matthey, Inc., No. 91-6699, 1992 WL 176497 (E.D.Pa. July 15, 1992) (holding that the general jurisdiction of the ICC does not bar the court from determining whether the parties operated pursuant to contract or common carriage). This Court agrees with those courts holding that the purposes of the doctrine of primary jurisdiction will be served through referral of the contract carriage issue to the ICC as it will promote uniformity in the application of the statutory scheme in the numerous Jones Truck Lines, Inc., Debtor-in-Possession cases filed.