Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="59 Dano" data-source="post: 5255679" data-attributes="member: 23516">Shot:The complaint, filed in Denver, accuses the Atlanta-based company of breach of contract, fraudulent inducement, fraudulent nondisclosure, intentional misrepresentation, and negligent misrepresentation, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and unjust enrichment.The &quot;Air-In-Ground&quot; program which UPS implemented in 1995 was designed to identify and sort &quot;air&quot; packages that could be transported by &quot;ground&quot; transport and still arrive at their destination on time.According to the complaint, UPS&#039;s Air-In-Ground program demonstrates the premeditated actions of UPS because the company agrees and accepts payment for air shipping yet has been &quot;systematically and deliberately&quot; substituting the far less expensive ground shipping services....Further, the complaint states that UPS charged its customers &quot;fuel surcharges&quot; to compensate for the rising costs of &quot;jet fuel&quot; knowing that those packages would never see the inside of a plane.[URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://legalnewsline.com/stories/510522368-ups-targeted-in-class-action-suit[/URL]Chaser:The district court correctly dismissed plaintiffs&#039; claims that UPS breached the shipping contracts by transporting their &quot;Air&quot; packages by truck instead of airplane. These claims rest on the premise that the word &quot;Air&quot; in UPS&#039;s trademarked service names was a contractual promise by UPS to use airplane transportation....From 1995 until 2001, the contracts provided that &quot;Some air shipments may be shipped by surface transportation.&quot; In 2000 and 2001, the contracts also provided that &quot;UPS will determine, in its sole discretion, the mode(s) of transportation for packages shipped via [Next Day and 2nd Day] Services&quot; and that those packages &quot;may be shipped by air or surface transportation, or both, at UPS&#039;s sole discretion.&quot; And from 2002 to the present, the contracts provided that &quot;UPS reserves the right in its sole discretion to use any mode of transportation whatsoever to provide the services selected by the shipper.&quot;...Plaintiffs try to inject ambiguity into these clear contract provisions based on the word &quot;Air&quot; in UPS&#039;s service names, asserting that &quot;Air&quot; services &quot;plainly referred to `air transport.&#039;&quot; This interpretation conflates UPS&#039;s &quot;services&quot; with modes of &quot;transportation&quot; despite the above-quoted contract provisions distinguishing these two concepts. Plaintiffs cannot override the clear contract terms by relying on their &quot;subjective understanding&quot; of the single word &quot;Air,&quot; isolated from its context as part of a service name....The district court correctly dismissed plaintiffs&#039; claims that UPS breached the shipping contracts by imposing on their truck-transported &quot;Air&quot; packages a fuel surcharge derived from indexed prices of jet fuel instead of diesel fuel. Plaintiffs&#039; interpretation finds no support in the shipping contracts, which expressly authorized UPS to apply a &quot;fuel surcharge&quot; to &quot;such services and for such periods as UPS, in its sole discretion, may determine necessary.&quot; The contracts do not in any way limit UPS&#039;s &quot;sole discretion&quot; to use only certain fuel indexes, and the contracts plainly link the fuel surcharges to UPS&#039;s service levels, not to particular modes of transportation....Arapahoe asserts that UPS affirmatively misrepresented that it would transport Arapahoe&#039;s &quot;Air&quot; packages by airplane and charge a diesel fuel surcharge. This claim is premised entirely on UPS&#039;s use of the word &quot;Air&quot; in the service name, and it fails for the same reasons as the breach-of-contract claims—the word &quot;Air&quot; was not an affirmative representation that UPS would use a particular mode of transportation or impose a particular fuel surcharge....Arapahoe also contends that UPS&#039;s use of the word &quot;Air&quot; in the service name constituted a misleading &quot;half-truth&quot; because it led customers to believe &quot;that they would receive something beyond Ground service in return for purchasing premium Air service, while concealing that they would receive nothing additional.&quot; This argument once again conflates UPS&#039;s service levels with modes of transportation; the fact that Arapahoe&#039;s &quot;Next Day Air&quot; packages were transported by truck does not mean that Arapahoe received &quot;Ground&quot; service.[URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://www.leagle.com/decision/infco20190423172[/URL]Lol</blockquote>

[QUOTE="59 Dano, post: 5255679, member: 23516"] Shot: [I]The complaint, filed in Denver, accuses the Atlanta-based company of breach of contract, fraudulent inducement, fraudulent nondisclosure, intentional misrepresentation, and negligent misrepresentation, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and unjust enrichment. The "Air-In-Ground" program which UPS implemented in 1995 was designed to identify and sort "air" packages that could be transported by "ground" transport and still arrive at their destination on time. According to the complaint, UPS's Air-In-Ground program demonstrates the premeditated actions of UPS because the company agrees and accepts payment for air shipping yet has been "systematically and deliberately" substituting the far less expensive ground shipping services. ... Further, the complaint states that UPS charged its customers "fuel surcharges" to compensate for the rising costs of "jet fuel" knowing that those packages would never see the inside of a plane.[/I] [URL unfurl="true"]https://legalnewsline.com/stories/510522368-ups-targeted-in-class-action-suit[/URL] Chaser: [I]The district court correctly dismissed plaintiffs' claims that UPS breached the shipping contracts by transporting their "Air" packages by truck instead of airplane. [B]These claims rest on the premise that the word "Air" in UPS's trademarked service names was a contractual promise by UPS to use airplane transportation.[/B][/I] ... [I]From 1995 until 2001, the contracts provided that "Some air shipments may be shipped by surface transportation." In 2000 and 2001, the contracts also provided that "UPS will determine, in its sole discretion, the mode(s) of transportation for packages shipped via [Next Day and 2nd Day] Services" and that those packages "may be shipped by air or surface transportation, or both, at UPS's sole discretion." And from 2002 to the present, the contracts provided that "UPS reserves the right in its sole discretion to use any mode of transportation whatsoever to provide the services selected by the shipper." ... Plaintiffs try to inject ambiguity into these clear contract provisions based on the word "Air" in UPS's service names, asserting that "Air" services "plainly referred to `air transport.'" This interpretation conflates UPS's "services" with modes of "transportation" despite the above-quoted contract provisions distinguishing these two concepts. [B]Plaintiffs cannot override the clear contract terms by relying on their "subjective understanding" of the single word "Air," isolated from its context as part of a service name.[/B][/I] ... [I]The district court correctly dismissed plaintiffs' claims that UPS breached the shipping contracts by imposing on their truck-transported "Air" packages a fuel surcharge derived from indexed prices of jet fuel instead of diesel fuel. Plaintiffs' interpretation finds no support in the shipping contracts, which expressly authorized UPS to apply a "fuel surcharge" to "such services and for such periods as UPS, in its sole discretion, may determine necessary." The contracts do not in any way limit UPS's "sole discretion" to use only certain fuel indexes, and the contracts plainly link the fuel surcharges to UPS's service levels, not to particular modes of transportation. ... Arapahoe asserts that UPS affirmatively misrepresented that it would transport Arapahoe's "Air" packages by airplane and charge a diesel fuel surcharge. This claim is premised entirely on UPS's use of the word "Air" in the service name, and it fails for the same reasons as the breach-of-contract claims—the word "Air" was not an affirmative representation that UPS would use a particular mode of transportation or impose a particular fuel surcharge. ... Arapahoe also contends that UPS's use of the word "Air" in the service name constituted a misleading "half-truth" because it led customers to believe "that they would receive [I]something[/I] beyond Ground service in return for purchasing premium Air service, while concealing that they would receive [I]nothing[/I] additional." This argument once again conflates UPS's service levels with modes of transportation; [B]the fact that Arapahoe's "Next Day Air" packages were transported by truck does not mean that Arapahoe received "Ground" service.[/B][/I] [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.leagle.com/decision/infco20190423172[/URL] Lol [/QUOTE]

Verification