U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1980

Consolidated Freightways Corp. v. Terry Tuck, Inc.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided January 28, 1980

612 F.2d 465 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

George Slaff, Slaff, Mosk & Rudman, Los Angeles, Cal., for defendant-appellant., Christopher Ashworth, Garfield, Tepper, & Ashworth, Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.

Cases that cite this one

12 later published cases cite this decision. The 11 that cite it most often are listed here.

MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. Best Telephone Co., Inc. (United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida 1994)
Gelb v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co. (District Court, S.D. New York 1993)
MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. Value Call International, Inc. (District Court, D. Kansas 1997)
International Telecommunications Exchange Corp. v. MCI Telecommunications Corp. (United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia 1995)
Milne Truck Lines, Inc. v. Makita U.S.A., Inc. (9th Cir. 1992)
Milne Truck Lines, Inc. v. Makita U.S.A., Inc. (9th Cir. 1992)
Marco Supply Company, Inc. A Virginia Corporation v. At & T Communications, Inc. (4th Cir. 1989)
Delta Traffic v. Transtop Inc. (District Court, D. Massachusetts 1989)
Delta Traffic Service, Inc. v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc. (District Court, S.D. Mississippi 1988)
Campbell Sixty Six Express, Inc. v. H.A. Cole Products Co. (In re Campbell Sixty Six Express, Inc.) (United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Missouri 1988)
Williams v. AT & T Technologies, Inc. (In re Silver Wheel Freightlines, Inc.) (District Court, D. Oregon 1986)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM:

Under the Motor Carriers Act § 217(b), 49 U.S.C. § 317(b) (1976), Consolidated Freightways sued Terry Tuck for an amount still owing under the applicable ICC-approved tariff. Terry Tuck counterclaimed for fraud, alleging that the carrier knowingly misquoted the shipping rates. The district court granted Consolidated’s summary judgment motion for the amount still due, and it dismissed the counterclaim pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). The facts are admittedly indistinguishable from those occurring in Aero Trucking, Inc. v. Regal Tube Co., 594 F.2d 619 (7th Cir. 1979); Pettibone v. Richardson, 126 F.2d 969 (7th Cir. 1942), and F. Burkhart Mfg. Co. v. Fort Worth & D. C. Ry. Co., 149 F.2d 909 (8th Cir. 1945). We agree with the Seventh and Eighth Circuits that no claim for relief can be predicated on a carrier’s alleged fraudulent misquotation of tariffs. Accordingly, the district court’s judgment and order are AFFIRMED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.