Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Fredette v. Transit Homes, 1st Cir. (1995)
Fredette v. Transit Homes, 1st Cir. (1995)
____________________
No. 94-1893
No. 94-1895
Plaintiffs, Appellees,
v.
Defendants, Appellants.
____________________
No. 94-1894
Plaintiffs, Appellants,
v.
Defendants, Appellees.
____________________
____________________
Before
_____________
____________________
Lines, I
Transit Homes
America, Inc.
____________________
in
a case concerning
went seriously
awry.
The
plaintiffs in the
district court
Van
("Mullen
Brothers")
("Transit").
and
Transit
Homes
of
America,
Inc.
the
laid
position
in
accepted.
its
Hickory,
The Fredettes
North
Carolina
Mullen
Massachusetts
a local
intrastate moves;
and
he
is
plant,
mover
North Carolina.
licensed only
for
In
January 1991,
Lindburg, came
a Mullen
sales
representative, Chad
home to inspect
The
canopy
Lindburg
and
detached
that they
shed. The
wanted to move
they wanted
-3-3-
Fredettes
explained
to be fully
to
all of its
insured.
After
that
meeting,
the Fredettes
GE plant there.
In
left
contents at
handed over
a check,
represented
all
hired
the
a cost of
payments required
move of
for
the
Fredettes
this amount
move.
Allied
the mobile
home to
with a guaranteed
signed an
$20,520; the
1991.
at the
transport the
subcontracted
and
planned to
North Carolina
mid-February, the
for
delivery date no
It
Transit and
According
25,
home and
he inspected
signed.
The Fredettes
February
21,
1991,
it on the
contract was
Lindburg
told them
that
Bedford
On
had
discovered pre-existing
lot.
home
that the
that
the
furnished
home
not to
would
Transit
with
not
be
moved
until
broad liability
and told
the
Fredettes
release.
-4-4-
Allied
The
home
and
hired
determined
Fredette
to
own
release
their
to Pittsfield, photographed
The
demanded by
expert,
Stanley
be safely moved
Fredettes refused to
Transit, but
on March
Bator,
the
who
if a fourth
sign the
broad
1, 1991,
Doris
arriving
in North
Fredettes and
Carolina on
March 12.
On
arrival, the
Bedford
until
the
refused to
Fredettes
adjustments.
The
required work,
removed
mobile home
on the
fence
made
and
refused to
lot
other
move the
home
to do it safely.
Massachusetts.
place the
mobile home
The
Fredettes hired
and Transit,
and returned
a local
to
company which
promptly placed the home onto the lot for an additional fee.
week
later,
after
number
of
requests
by
the
Fredettes,
steps, had
not
to block and
yet
arrived.
Apparently
in a dispute
-5-5-
Allied
the front
and
the
fees
incurred
deliver
during
the moving
the personal
delay,
and
belongings until
Allied refused
the storage
to
fee was
paid.
moved
into
their
home the
next
day,
45
days after
the
While
the
depressed
GE.
home
was
en route,
Paul
in
because
May of
of
1991, but
depression.
emotional distress.
in
became
work
Fredette
left
Doris
Ultimately,
Massachusetts state
again in
Fredette
He returned to
September, again
also
suffered
court, alleging
a number
suit
of claims
The
court,
defendants
and
counts:
ultimately the
count
Amendment, 49
contract;
consumer
removed the
U.S.C.
count IV
alleged
suit
parties
federal district
went to
violation
11707; count
alleged
to
II
trial
on four
the
Carmack
of
charged breach
violation
of
of
Massachusetts
intentional
infliction of
emotional distress;
and count
____________________
1Count III,
-6-6-
11,
1994; Count
afterward.
After the
dismissed Mullen as
emotional
claim and
distress.
a party.
contract
On April 14,
by the court
district court
1994, the
the claim
It found
of intentional
jury
breach of
infliction of
Transit on
the
intentional
awarded
Carmack Amendment
infliction
$36,000,
of
claim
emotional
representing
and the
distress.
$18,500
on
claim
The
the
of
jury
Carmack
against Allied;
these defendants on
found
Allied
generally
motions
and
Transit
preserving
were denied.
judgments against
rejection
of their
duly
the claims
filed
now
post-trial
made
motions,
on appeal,
but
them.
claim
against Mullen
and the
district
1.
49
U.S.C.
11707,
incorporates common
loss
or
interstate.
injury
Id.
___
law principles
to
the
property"
11707(a)(1).
-7-7-
that
of
it
transports
the
move
of
the mobile
Fredettes $18,500
Transit
argues
sufficient
jury;
home,
and
against Transit
that
the
it
Fredettes
seeks
jury awarded
for damages to
alternatively
the
failed
remittitur
the home.
to
to take the
the
present
case to the
or,
in
the
Carmack
Amendment
may
"actual loss or
injury to
the
plaintiff
recover as damages
suing
only the
property," ordinarily
under
measured
by the
the
either by
defendant or
the reduction
in
by replacement
or
& Gown Co., Inc. v. Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc., 899 F.2d
________________
_______________________________
291,
296 (4th
Cir. 1990).
There is no
property at
issue.
Cleveland
_________
S.
and
Paul
contractor
request
Fredette
and
who
examined
of
immediately prior
of
had
by
Irvin
Finger;
the home
at
by Doris
Finger
the
was
Fredettes'
photographs
list
the
home
taken
to the move.
repair tasks
and
on
Finger
proposed
the
Pittsfield
supplied a
price
of
lot
written
$10,500.
-8-8-
into evidence.
Although Transit
and tear
otherwise.
was demonstrated,
the
jury was
entitled to
find
before the
and
door casing,
testifying to the
missing shingles,
injuries discovered
broken window
soiled rugs,
damage to
and similar
Another witness
wall.
The
photographs.
jury
was
also
entitled
to
consider
the
by the
to the
mobile home.
Even assuming
$18,500 against
estimated
by
him--is
puzzling.
award of
of the damages
Possibly,
as
Transit
was not liable (e.g., damage to the porch and shed which were
____
moved
mesh.
But
Transit
misinstructed, so we
has
not
claimed
have to assume
that
the
jury
was
intended
to
-9-9-
than
the
and then
value those
amount assigned
Under the
by
the
injuries more
Fredettes' own
highly
witness.
well as
downward, from the opinion of the expert; and this makes good
sense
wherever the
for
a broken
jury
could reasonably
expert opinion.2
window or
have valued
The jury
dented fender;
could do
the
so
defective dynamo
The
rugs, repainting,
frame) were
damaged
not especially
sidings
and
roof,
exotic in character
broken
door
and nothing
prevented
the jurors
common sense
estimate.
from
using their
to adjust upward
own experience
or downward the
and
expert's own
but it
is hard to
say that
it was irrational
or that
the
an
abuse of discretion.
2.
judgment
of $7,500
against
The
Fredettes also
Allied for
breach of
won
contract
____________________
_____________________________________________
Chandler, 231 So.2d 329,
________
is
not
bound
by
opinion
evidence
of
("a jury
damages,
though
undisputed").
-10-10-
based
resulted
from
events
outside
its control
and
sought
an
instruction on
frustration of
purpose.
The
district court
that the
to
the
jury,
evidence.
1091,
(1995).
if
Sullivan
________
legally
v.
correct
and
supported
by
the
F.3d
The
determination
of whether
court in the
appellate review.
frustration of
Id. at
___
there was
is subject to
1107-09.
evidence
Assuming
purpose is to be determined
appropriate
arguendo that
________
by the jury in a
9.7, at
722
no reasonable jury
The doctrine
of frustration
of purpose, recognized
condition,
but
"[p]erformance
performance
destroyed
not
remains
to the
the
only
one,
is
possible"--"the
party
seeking to
-11-11-
in
The central
that--although
expected
be
value
excused has
. . ."
of
been
Chase Precast
_____________
Corp.
_____
v.
Paonessa Co.,
____________
566 N.E.2d
603, 608
(Mass. 1991),
GE plant
might
in North
have argued
Carolina had
burned down,
(not necessarily
If the
the Fredettes
with success)
that the
Obviously, the
Allied--to
arrange for
a move
of home
and
contract with
possessions to
Allied might
impracticability of
________________
relating
to the
on impossibility or
_____________
performance, or even
immediate fitness
of
on mutual mistake
_______________
the mobile
transportation.
Whether
these sister
any of
doctrines could
home for
properly have
3.
Allied
and
instructing
Transit
the jury
distress claim.
argue
about
that the
trial
the elements
judge
of the
erred in
emotional
First, that
the defendants
intended to
Both
cause, or
of
should
cause
have
known that
emotional
its
distress; and,
defendants'
conduct
and, Third,
that
was
the actions
suffered
Second,
extreme and
[sic] conduct
of
the
that the
outrageous;
defendants
emotional
would
distress.
the
In
and
yourselves
utterly
whether
the
outrageous,
conduct
you
was
must
ask
beyond
all
-12-12-
bounds
of
decency and
utterly
intolerable
in a
civilized community.
It should be
The
district
court's
Judicial
(Mass.
Court, Sena
____
1994).
In
instructions
are
taken
almost
v. Commonwealth,
____________
this
case,
the
629 N.E.2d
defendants
986, 994
submitted
and
___
to
endure it."
That
language is
v.
be "severe"
355
taken from
that court's
N.E.2d 315,
319
(Mass. 1976)
(quotations omitted).
the "reasonable
person" language,
and an objection
to this
person" language.
Every
intentional infliction
"reasonable
person"
language
and
decided an
simply
required
the
____________________
court's
post-trial memorandum
conflict.
But
was preserved.
do so.
The
and
order
in
proper objection
-13-13-
emotional distress.4
This
is so
distress is at
issue.
v. Gonzalez,
________
576
court
than a
decade, we
find no
error, much
less
prejudicial error.
Both
Allied
and Transit
entitled to
judgment as a
this claim.
The
jury
could have
party."
Havinga
_______
F.3d 1480,
that
contend
matter of law
returned a
verdict
that they
or a new
"no reasonable
adverse to
and we review
decision on such a
motion.
granted if the
are
trial on
the moving
district court's
new
also
24
de novo the
_______
Id.
___
As for a
weight of the
abuse
of discretion.
Allied
wrongful,
and Transit
was
not
bad
argue that
enough to
their conduct,
be
deemed
even if
extreme
and
n.6
____________________
v. Heller, 651
______
at 994; Haddad
______
v. Gonzalez,
________
824, 827
(Mass. 1988).
"reasonable person"
infliction
language in
of emotional
The
court referred
an opinion
distress in
1982.
-14-14-
to the
about negligent
_________
See
___
Payton v.
______
outrageous.
In
disassociate
the home
part, this
on the lot
initial adjustment
presented
argument rests on
even after
Bedford
evidence
that
to place
made the
had
But
the
Fredettes
ratified
Bedford's
that Transit
and Allied
to
who refused
demanded.
Transit
an effort
further, and
decision to
There
was other
conduct of
might have
disapproved.
release from
the
the Fredettes
lead in seeking
to obtain a
well beyond
before sending
a crew to block
three weeks
more to deliver
the Fredettes'
belongings (including
car,
and the
to
furniture
steps
their
their
home)
until
cited
to
the
Most
of
the
Massachusetts
argument
held insufficient in
(Mass.
1987); there,
sidetracked
in his
cases
Transit has a
is not much
job and
acquitted of
ostracized by
by
plausible
an employee
us
508 N.E.2d 72
assault was
other employees.
Still, in
thought that
the company's
formal
-15-15-
Foley's
employment
legitimate
business
in a
manner consistent
concerns," id.
___
at
82;
with Polaroid's
and the
court
apparently
equated
the
harassment
with
"mere
insults,
claim.
Id.
___
Here,
we think
hardly compelled,
withholding of
verbal
and
that
to
find bad
was entitled,
faith;
other
minor
Allied, Transit
the jury
abuses
that
and the
delays
and
Polaroid
employees
viewed, we think
although
that the
deference to be
to view
wrongs.
accorded to
So
the
4.
claimed
against
Massachusetts'
the
far-reaching
Gen.
L. ch. 93A.
acts
or practices in the
and
provides
individuals.
after the
defendants
The
for
The 93A
violation
consumer protection
private
Fredettes also
of
trade or commerce"
action
-16-16-
law, Mass.
"unfair or deceptive
conduct of any
right
of
for
aggrieved
district court
that no violation
defendants.
had occurred,
93A is
phrased
might suggest.
low
the
in terms
different than
the
threshold,
repeatedly held
unethical
favor of
Although
very
and ruled in
but
that 93A
the
Massachusetts
or unscrupulous or
at least
courts
have
is immoral,
attains "a
level of
rascality" that
goes
well beyond
ordinary
practice.
Corp.,
_____
F.3d 40,
44
43
(1st
Cir.
tough
business
1995) (citing
numerous
of fact,
district
entitled
judgment
Massachusetts cases).
the
judge
was
extent of deception,
to
reach
existence and
faith.
Whether
or
not
not
of reason.
standards
The Fredettes
also rely on
a regulation issued
by the
"[i]t is
-17-17-
an
expeditious."
a pattern of conduct,
in
which
the
representations.
or at least to an
promisor
knows
that
Whatever other
it
individual occasion
is
making
criticisms may be
untrue
made of
The
Fredettes'
behaved unfairly
other
succession of
that the
defendants
a price that
additional charges
district judge
is
theory
relating to
as the trier of
and demands
(e.g., the
____
But
the
take a
more benign
clearly
view
beyond
and
regard
what was
these extra
agreed
to
or
foreseen.
demands
as
as
not
occasioned
This view,
by
although
5.
brief as
not
the close of
evidence.
At
a defendant at
their
acted as the
the wrongs
they attribute to
Lindburg.
These wrongs
they
-18-18-
"fully covered"
It
Fredettes since
and
Allied and
matters to the
solvent,
Lindburg was
the
show
Fredettes point us to
nothing in the
Affirmed.
_________
-19-19-