Phillips v. J.H. Transport, Inc.

6 Citing cases

  1. Lands v. Ward

    349 So. 3d 219 (Ala. 2021)   Cited 14 times

    " Phillips v. J.H. Transp., Inc., 565 So. 2d 66, 70 (Ala. 1990) (quoting Transamerican Freight Lines v. Brada Miller Freight Sys., 423 U.S. 28, 37, 96 S.Ct. 229, 46 L.Ed.2d 169 (1975) ). Simply put, the regulations are designed to prevent motor carriers from shirking responsibility if someone gets hurt in an accident involving a commercial motor vehicle.

  2. Webb v. Steelsummit Holdings Inc.

    2:22-cv-00196-MHH (N.D. Ala. May. 21, 2024)

    ‘problem of a transfer of operating authority, with its attendant difficulties of enforcing safety requirements and fixing financial responsibility for damage and injuries to shippers and members of the public.' ” Phillips v. J.H. Transp., Inc., 565 So.2d 66, 70 (Ala. 1990) (quoting Transamerican Freight Lines v. Brada Miller Freight Sys., 423 U.S. 28, 37, 96 S.Ct. 229, 46 L.Ed.2d 169 (1975)). Simply put, the regulations are designed to prevent motor carriers from shirking responsibility if someone gets hurt in an accident involving a commercial motor vehicle.

  3. Brown v. Old South Freight Service, Inc.

    590 So. 2d 877 (Ala. 1991)

    In fact, the record discloses that Old South's name was on the truck's fuel tank. Finally, Miller testified that the first two Interstate Commerce Commission ("ICC") numbers on the truck — "19" — were not Neely ICC registration numbers. We find that the Browns did present substantial evidence of a genuine issue of material fact concerning Smothers's agency, making the summary judgment for Old South inappropriate. Accord Hatton v. Chem-Haulers, Inc., 393 So.2d 950 (Ala. 1980) (question of agency properly submitted to jury); Ex parte Hicks, 537 So.2d 486 (Ala. 1988) (judgment for trucking company based on directed verdict reversed because question of fact existed regarding whether driver was its agent); Phillips v. J.H. Transport, Inc., 565 So.2d 66 (Ala. 1990) (judgment for trucking company based on directed verdict reversed because there was evidence from which jury could conclude truck was still under long-term lease with company). The judgment in favor of Old South is reversed.

  4. Castro v. Budget Rent-A-Car System, Inc.

    154 Cal.App.4th 1162 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 33 times
    Holding Alabama's interests predominant over California's where auto accident occurred in Alabama, even though California resident victim could be financial burden on California

    As discussed below, Alabama law applies to the liability issue in this case. Nevertheless, it appears that the nondelegable duty doctrine is a general common law principle recognized under both California and Alabama law. (See Serna, supra, 110 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1479-1486; Phillips v. J.H. Transport, Inc. (Ala. 1990) 565 So.2d 66, 69-70 ["` "[w]here one operates a motor carrier under a government franchise, he assumes liability for the acts done by others to whom he grants permission to use his franchise and permit." He may not delegate his rights under his franchise and permit and thus avoid liability'"].

  5. Outlaw v. R.E. Garrison Trucking, Inc.

    612 So. 2d 494 (Ala. Civ. App. 1993)

    "Whether Forbes was an employee of Austin at the time of his death is not totally determinative on the issue of his status as a member of the general public and thus able to maintain an action against Garrison. At the very least, Forbes was a co-driver and thus not a protected person under the appropriate ICC regulations. "The Alabama Supreme Court has not specifically addressed this issue, although it has specifically stated its approval of the public policy behind the ICC regulations and their intent to protect the public in Phillips v. J.H. Transport, Inc., 565 So.2d 66 (Ala. 1990). The Fifth and Eleventh Circuits have decided this issue and this court finds those cases to be authoritative.

  6. Paul v. Bogle

    193 Mich. App. 479 (Mich. Ct. App. 1992)   Cited 63 times
    Noting that under Michigan Vehicle Code, an owner is anyone who leases a vehicle for more than thirty days

    See, e.g., Schindele v Ulrich, 268 N.W.2d 547, 551 (Minn, 1978), app dis sub nom Sammons v Schindele, 439 U.S. 1059 (1978); Pace v Southern Express Co, 409 F.2d 331 (CA 7, 1969); Gudgel v Southern Shippers, Inc, 387 F.2d 723 (CA 7, 1967). See, e.g., Phillips v J H Transport, Inc. 565 So.2d 66, 70-71 (Ala, 1990) (failure to remove placards raises a presumption of control), and Wilson v Riley Whittle, Inc, 145 Ariz. App. 317, 321; 701 P.2d 575 (1984). See, e.g., Wyckoff Trucking, Inc v Marsh Bros Trucking Service, Inc, 58 Ohio St.3d 261, 265-266; 569 N.E.2d 1049 (1991); John B Barbour Trucking Co v Texas, 758 S.W.2d 684, 687, n 4 (Tex App, 1988); Nationwide Mutual Ins Co v Holbrooks, 187 Ga. App. 706, 711-713; 371 S.E.2d 252 (1988); Planet Ins Co v Transport Indemnity Co, 823 F.2d 285 (CA 9, 1987); Harvey v F-B Truck Line Co, 115 Idaho 411, 417-418; 767 P.2d 254 (1987); Wilkerson v Allied Van Lines, Inc, 360 Pa. Super. 523, 527-528; 521 A.2d 25 (1987) (apparent approval); Rediehs Express, Inc v Maple, 491 N.E.2d 1006, 1012 (Ind App, 1986); Empire Fire Marine Ins Co v Truck Ins Exchange, 462 So.2d 76, 79 (Fla App, 1985); McLean Trucking Co v Occidental Fire Casualty Co of North Carolina, 72 N.C. App. 285, 290; 324 S.E.2d 633 (1985); Price v Westmoreland, 727 F.2d 494 (CA 5, 1984); Schell v Na