Free Complaint - District Court of California - California

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 1 of 36

Jay Sharani and Catherine Sharani 5688 Walnut Street Dublin, CA 94568 Telephone: (925) 594-0996 E-Mail: [email protected] Plaintiffs Pro Se

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
JAY SHARANI and CATHERINE SHARANI,

$\

&

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR:
Plaintiffs,
VS.

(1) BREACH OF BILL OF LADING CONTRACT (2) NEGLIGENCE

AT1 & SANTORI, Inc., aka LOGISTICS EMIRATES L.L.C., Defendant(s).

EIS Plaintiffs allege:

JURISDICTION
This Court has jurisdiction over this complaint because it arises under the laws of the States. This action is brought pursuant to the Carriage of Goods By Sea Act (COGSA),

25

I1
1I

Title 46 U.S.C. 1301, et seq.

26
27

This Court has jurisdiction of the subject matter of this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. l12. Section 1331, which states that the district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.
1

I

28

I

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 2 of 36

3.

This Court has personal jurisdiction over the parties in this action as a result of the

Defendant's wrongful acts hereinafter complained of which violated the Plaintiffs' rights to receive household items in an undamaged condition and on the scheduled arrival date herinafter set forth at length. The Defendant's wrongful act consisted of delivering all of Plaintiffs' household goods in a damaged condition. Defendant failed to deliver goods to San Francisco and also failed to notify Plaintiffs when goods arrived in Oakland.

VENUE
4.
Pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C. Sections 1391(b)(2) and 1391(c) venue is proper in the

Northern District of California, Oakland Division because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this District, and because Defendant is a corporation subject to the Court's personal jurisdiction.

INTRADISTRICT ASSIGNMENT
5.

Assignment to the Oakland Division is proper because a substantial part of the events or

omission giving rise to the claim occurred in Alameda County.

THE PARTIES 6.
The Plaintiffs, Jay Sharani and Catherine Sharani are, and at all relevant times mentioned

were individuals and residents of the County of Alameda, State of California. 7. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and allege thereon, that defendant, Salviati &

Santori, is the delivery agent for the carrier, IAL Logistics Emirates L.L.C., of Dubai, United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.). Defendant Salviati & Santori is registered as a California corporation with its principal place of business at 301 Westmont Drive, San Pedro, Los Angeles County, California 9073 1.

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 3 of 36

COUNT I (Breach of Bill of Lading Contract:Violation of Title 46 U.S.C. Section 1303, et seq.)
8. Plaintiffs Jay Sharani and Catherine Sharani hereby incorporate by reference all of the

allegations contained in paragraphs 1-7, inclusive, as though set forth herein at length. 9. On February 9,2008, Plaintiffs entered into a Bill of Lading contract with IAL Logistics

L.L.C., Dubai, U.A.E., for shipment of seventy (70) pieces of household goods from the Port of Jebel, Ali, U.A.E. to San Francisco, California. Defendant Salviati & Santori is, and at all relevant times were, the delivery agent for IAL Logistics. A true and correct copy of the Bill of Lading contract is incorporated herein and attached hereto as Exhibit "A." Pursuant to Title 46 U.S.C. $ 1300, the attached Bill of Lading is evidence of a contract between the parties for the carriage of Plaintiffs' goods by sea from Dubai, U.A.E. to San Francisco. 10. On March 5,2008, Plaintiff Jay Sharani wired payment for shipment of the goods in the

amount of $3,600.00 to IAL Logistics's Citibank account in Dubai, U.A.E. A true and correct copy of the receipt for this payment is incorporated herein and attached hereto as Exhibit "B." 11. The Bill of Lading shows the goods were received by the carrier in Dubai on February 9,

2008 "in apparent good order and condition." Under terms of the contract, Defendant agreed to notify Plaintiffs when the goods arrived at the place of delivery in San Francisco. 12. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and allege thereon that the goods were shipped from

Dubai, U.A.E. on February 9,2008 and arrived in Oakland, California, on March 17,2008. The departure and arrival dates are shown on documents issued by Carmichael International Service, a customs broker. The documents, incorporated herein and attached hereto as Exhibit "C" consist of a pick upldelivery order and preliminary claim. 13. Defendant failed to notify Plaintiffs when their household goods arrived in Oakland,

3

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 4 of 36

California on March 17,2008. Despite numerous e-mail inquiries over a period of two months, the Dubai office did not respond. After contacting Defendant's New York office, Plaintiff was referred to their California office, who informed him that his shipment had arrived and had been sitting in Oakland for weeks without any notification to Plaintiffs of the arrival. See Plaintiffs letter dated April 18,2008, incorporated herein and attached hereto as Exhibit "D." 14. On or about May 20,2008, Carmichael International Service located the goods at the St.

George Warehouse in Oakland. The goods were in the process of being sold at auction. 15. As a result of Defendant's failure to notify Plaintiffs when their shipment arrived and the

subsequent warehousing of their goods as unclaimed freight, Plaintiffs incurred storage and othel fees in the amount of $5,070.00. A true and correct copy of Carmichael International's invoice is incorporated herein and attached hereto as Exhibit "E." 16. On May 23,2008, Cargo Express Trucking Company delivered the goods to Plaintiffs

home at 5688 Walnut Street, Dublin, California. Most of the household items were heavily damaged and cannot be used. Moreover, some of the items shipped from Dubai were missing. Original and authentic digital photographs of the damaged goods are incorporated herein and attached hereto as Exhibit "F." Plaintiffs' goods were purchased in Dubai two years ago at a cos of $10,000.00. 17. Defendant breached the Bill of Lading contract by violating Title 46 U.S.C. $ 1303, et

seq., which states, among other things, that "[Tlhe carrier shall properly and carefully load,

handle, stow, carry, keep, care for, and discharge the goods carried." See Section 1303 (2). Moreover, the Bill of Lading creates a prima facie case because Plaintiffs' goods were tendered in good condition and the Defendant failed to deliver the goods in the same condition and in the same quantity. See Section 1303(4). Specifically, Defendant breached the contract and violated

4

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 5 of 36

Title 46 U.S.C.

5 1303 by and without limitation:

I I I I1 II I III

a)

Failing to deliver the goods to San Francisco, California, the place of delivery

shown on the bill of lading; b) c) Failing to notify Plaintiffs after the goods arrived in Oakland, California; Failing to deliver the goods in the same good condition they were in when

tendered to the carrier in Dubai, U.A.E. on February 9,2008; and d) Failing to deliver the same quantity of goods that were tendered to the carrier in

I

Dubai, U.A.E. on February 9,2008. 18. Plaintiffs performed all conditions and promises under the Bill of Lading contract,

including prepayment for delivery of freight, compliance with Clause 7 (Merchant's Responsibility) and Clause 14 (Delivery of Goods). 19. As the result of the aforementioned Defendant's violation of Title 46 U.S.C. Section

I
11

I

1300, et seq., Plaintiffs Jay Sharani and Catherine Sharani are entitled to damages as set forth

I I III

20.

Plaintiffs hereby incorporate by reference all of the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-

19, inclusive, as though set forth herein at length. 21. Pursuant to Title 46 U.S.C. Section 1303(2), Defendant owed Plaintiffs a legal duty,

arising out of the Bill of Lading Contract, to conform to a standard of conduct to protect

II 1

I I

Plaintiffs goods from damage and loss of any items. Defendant breached the duty of due care as follows: (a) Defendant failed to notify Plaintiffs after the goods arrived in Oakland,

5

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 6 of 36

California. As a result, Plaintiffs incurred $5,070.00 in storage fees that could have been avoided had Defendant complied with the notification provision of the contract. (b) Defendant failed to deliver the household items in the same good condition they were in when tendered to the carrier in Dubai, U.A.E. on February 9,2008. (c) Defendant failed to deliver the same quantity of goods that were tendered to the carrier in Dubai, U.A.E. on February 9,2008.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment as follows:
1. For statutory damages in the amount of $35,000.00; For compensatory damages in the amount of $3,620.00, including $20.00 wire fee, to recover cost to ship the goods; 2. For compensatory damages in the amount of $5,070.00 to recover storage fees and other costs as a result of Defendant's negligence in failing to contact the laintiffs when the goods arrived; 3. For compensatory damages in the amount of $10,000.00 for cost of damaged and missing goods;
4.

For consequential damages in an amount to be proved at trial; For general damages; For unspecified damages for loss of important documents, including receipts for furniture and other items purchased in Dubai, U.A.E.;

5. 6.

7. 8.

For recovery of full costs, including document preparation fees; For attorney fees; and

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 7 of 36

9.

For such other and further relief as this Honorable Court may deem just and proper.

Dated:

m
harani Plaintiff Pro Se Catherine Sharani Plaintiff Pro Se

Respectfully submitted,

Dated:

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 8 of 36

EXHIBIT "ASS

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 9 of 36

~ l o a m p n e M e 1 1 4 1 r x l l h ' ~ m u s o rtow pn so urn

-.

w

*D

w

an-S

aNV l N n 0 3 'MOlS

'avo1 S .N3ddIHS
en(e~ -=r3 .8UWnqsUl (WU03 WQwadUlel

ew

uo (3) + (E)(P)B =nu13 a Jeletl :uopw=a

U/U
lml

134fI34

-

OOOSI l V 1 0 1

V3'03SISNWJNVS
AWIW lo ~ 3 q d

V3 'aNVlXV0
eh-a
JO

31000 / ~ ~ ~ 1 f l b AVS3l NO
pod
= IA

'lUnOJJV JJU6lSUOj UO s a b e q ~u o m l a ~ a w I I puv 8u11puoq l o ~ uollounsaa l o u ~/j uod a 6 ~ e q ~ s 1 a

'3'v.n

'nv i 3 e 3 r
h!peol 1 uod 0

'3'v.n

'nv

we3r

rd!a?etl lo =s!d

6L699EE SZ 1600:BOW '9ZIP6 V3 03SI3NWJ NVS '9L9Z XOB 'O'd 'OY3aV3NVBW3 3NO '110 N313SS3 0 3 1 INWVHS AVI'NW

LLZZE88 tIL600:XVd SSSEE88 tIL600:1318ZTEEILSO:ON 1NOdSSVd INWVHS X NIBVr'NW 8EZOOObSlV3MJ9 .w &rlpsl

ll!a

u!Wo lo bun=

..tl3atl0 O L a 3 N 9 I S N 0 3 S S 3 l N f l 3 1 8 V l l O 9 3 N I O N

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 10 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 11 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 12 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 13 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 14 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 15 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 16 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 17 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 18 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 19 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 20 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 21 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 22 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 23 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 24 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 25 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 26 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 27 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 28 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 29 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 30 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 31 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 32 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 33 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 34 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 35 of 36

Case 3:08-cv-03854-MEJ

Document 1

Filed 08/12/2008

Page 36 of 36