This year’s edition features a discussion of the upcoming US Supreme Court case that is expected to determine the fate of the broad FAAAA defense to the liability of freight brokers; an analysis of the Texas Supreme Court’s decision that reversed the Werner decision (in which an appellate court had affirmed a jury award against Werner Enterprises for $90 million); a long summary of a convoluted MCS-90 decision that our firm, working with distinguished Georgia counsel, has appealed to the Eleventh Circuit; and much more.
Kaitlyn McClaine has neatly organized this year’s cargo cases into bite-sized lessons; and Ian Linker returns to the problem of outrageous towing bills among his other efforts for this edition—including gathering and classifying the decisions as they were published (or not published) all year long.
That reminds us: have a look at how few of the 2025 decisions we have reviewed contain official citations. What causes federal judges not to publish? How healthy is a legal system in which an estimated 90 percent of opinions are not reported through the official channels? Is it because the judges view most cases they preside over as unimportant or not contributing anything new? Are they hoping to avoid published decisions by the appellate courts that reverse their rulings? For a deeper discussion of this important question, have a look at the 2021 article by Susan W. Johnson and others entitled “To Publish or Not Publish: Exploring Federal District Judges’ Published Decisions” available here at the link and online at Oregon State University’s website.
We also welcome this year’s guest author Stephen Johnson’s piece on avoiding bad faith. A nationally known expert on the topic, he reviews best practices for insurers and third-party administrators. As always, we appreciate your readership and look forward to hearing from you with your responses and questions.
Click here to read more.