Skip to main content
The Darvish Firm, APC, Attorneys At Law
Home chevron_right Legal Glossary chevron_right Carmack Amendment
California Legal Glossary: Trucking & Cargo Claims

What Is the Carmack Amendment?

The Carmack Amendment, 49 U.S.C. section 14706, is the federal statute that governs a motor carrier's liability for loss or damage to cargo moving in interstate commerce. It makes the carrier that issued the bill of lading, and any delivering carrier, liable for the actual loss or injury to the property, without the shipper having to prove negligence.

Carmack's power cuts both ways. For shippers, it creates near strict liability: a prima facie case requires only proof that the goods were delivered to the carrier in good condition, arrived damaged or not at all, and the amount of damages. The carrier then must prove both its own freedom from negligence and that the loss came from an excepted cause such as an act of God, the shipper's own fault, or the inherent vice of the goods. For carriers, Carmack preempts virtually all state law claims arising from cargo loss, sweeping away fraud, negligence, and consumer claims and channeling everything into the federal scheme, with its released value limitations and short claim deadlines.

Bills of lading typically require written claims within nine months and suit within two years and a day after a claim is denied, so cargo disputes reward speed. Stolen loads, double brokering losses, and refused shipments all get analyzed through this framework.

The Prima Facie Case

Carmack creates a near strict liability regime, which is why cargo claims look so different from ordinary negligence cases. The shipper generally establishes a prima facie case by proving three things: the goods were delivered to the carrier in good condition, they arrived damaged or short or did not arrive at all, and the amount of the damages.

The shipper does not have to prove how the damage happened or that the carrier was careless. Once the prima facie case is made, the burden shifts to the carrier to show both that the loss was caused by one of the narrow excepted causes and that the carrier was free from negligence.

The Five Excepted Causes

The recognized defenses are narrow: an act of God, the public enemy, an act or default of the shipper, public authority, and the inherent vice or nature of the goods themselves. Each requires the carrier to also prove its own freedom from negligence, so establishing the cause alone is not a defense.

Cargo theft is conspicuously absent from that list, and courts have generally declined to treat thieves as the public enemy. A stolen load therefore typically remains the carrier's responsibility, and the real fight moves to who actually had possession and what liability limitation, if any, was properly established.

Preemption and What It Takes Away

Carmack broadly preempts state law claims against a motor carrier for cargo loss or damage in interstate transport. Claims for negligence, breach of contract, bailment, and in most cases state statutory claims are generally displaced by the federal remedy.

That matters because it usually eliminates consequential and punitive damages theories that would be available under state law. It also does not necessarily reach every party in a freight transaction the same way, and claims against brokers in particular are analyzed differently. See our Carmack Amendment and cargo claims page.

Common Questions

What are the deadlines on a cargo claim?

Under most bills of lading, a written claim must be filed with the carrier within nine months of delivery, or of the scheduled delivery date where the shipment never arrived, and suit must be filed within two years and one day after the carrier issues a written denial. These are minimums the carrier may set by contract and courts enforce them strictly. Calendar both dates as soon as a loss appears, and make sure the written claim actually meets the regulatory content requirements.

My load was stolen. Is the carrier still on the hook?

Generally yes. Theft is not among the narrow excepted causes under Carmack, and courts have not treated cargo thieves as the public enemy, so a carrier is typically liable for a stolen load. The contested issues are usually different: whether a valid liability limitation was properly established, who actually had the freight at the time, which is a live question where the load was brokered or re-brokered, and whose insurance responds. Investigate immediately, because these facts degrade fast.

Facing This Issue in Real Life?

A definition is a starting point, not a strategy. Our Los Angeles litigators can evaluate your specific situation. Call (310) 677-3512.

GET IN TOUCH