From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Federal Express Corporation v. Superior Court (Steve Cohen)

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Fifth Division
Mar 12, 2010
No. B219795 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 12, 2010)

Opinion

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING. Amended Petition for Writ of Mandate. Abraham Kahn, Judge., No. BC401452.

Edward L. Stanton III and Michel J. Duquella for Petitioners Federal Express Corporation, Fedex Corporate Services, Inc., Fedex Customer Information Services, Inc., and Fedex Corporation.

Benjamin J. Ferron and Michel J. Duquella for Petitioner Fedex Ground Package System, Inc.

Marlin & Saltzman, Stanley D. Saltzman, Louis M. Marlin and Stephen P. O’Dell; and Ecoff, Law & Salomons, Gary K. Salomons and Lawrence C. Ecoff for Real Party in Interest.


TURNER, P. J.

Defendants, Federal Express Corporation, FedEx Corporate Services, Inc., FedEx Customer Information Services, Inc., FedEx Corporation and FedEx Ground Package System, Inc., filed an amended mandate petition to set aside to set aside an August 27, 2009 order overruling their demurrers to the first amended class action complaint of plaintiff, Steve Cohen. Defendants are correct--the fourth cause for unfair competition in violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200 is preempted by the title 49 United States Code section 41713(b)(1) which is part of the Airline Deregulation Act. (American Airlines, Inc. v. Wolens (1995) 513 U.S. 219, 222, 232.) We cannot verify, at the demurrer stage, that any of plaintiff’s remaining claims, which may yield only contract breach damages, are preempted the Airline Deregulation Act. (Id. at pp. 229-232; Power Standards Lab., Inc. v. Federal Express Corp. (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 1039, 1044.) The result is the same under the Federal Aviation Administration Act of 1994 and the Carmack Amendment which involves damage to shipped goods. (Rowe v. New Hampshire Motor Transport. Assn. (2008) 552 U.S. 364, 370; Adams Express Co. v. Croninger (1913) 226 U.S. 491, 504.) In light of entirely clear well settled United States Supreme Court preemption authority, this is an appropriate case for issuance of a peremptory writ of mandate in the first instance. (Lewis v. Superior Court (1999) 19 Cal.4th 1232, 1261; Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc. (l984) 36 Cal.3d 171, 180.)

The amended mandate petition is granted as to the fourth cause of action only. Upon remittitur issuance, the demurrer is to be sustained as to the fourth cause of action without leave to amend only. The amended petition is denied in all other respects. All parties are to bear their own costs incurred in connection with these extraordinary writ proceedings.

We concur: ARMSTRONG, J., WEISMAN, J.

Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.


Summaries of

Federal Express Corporation v. Superior Court (Steve Cohen)

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Fifth Division
Mar 12, 2010
No. B219795 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 12, 2010)
Case details for

Federal Express Corporation v. Superior Court (Steve Cohen)

Case Details

Full title:FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION, et al., Petitioners, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Second District, Fifth Division

Date published: Mar 12, 2010

Citations

No. B219795 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 12, 2010)