On June 4, 2004, a U.S. District Court in Jacksonville, FL, denied a motion by Landstar System Inc. and its subsidiary companies to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) for alleged violations of the truth-in-leasing regulations. Landstar had sought dismissal of the action, arguing that the plaintiff owner-operators did not have a “private right of action” under the federal leasing regulations to sue motor carriers directly for violations of the federal regulations.

OOIDA filed the lawsuit in November 2002, along with seven of its owner-operator members, alleging several violations of the regulations, including overcharges for fuel Landstar buys from truck stops when owner-operators use their Comdata-issued fuel card, excessive chargebacks imposed by Landstar for fees charged to them by Comdata, and overcharges for base plates and permits. OOIDA is also seeking refunds of chargebacks to or reductions from compensation for costs charged by U.S. Bank on Department of Defense shipments.

Citing court opinions in several other OOIDA lawsuits against motor carriers, U.S. District Judge Henry Lee Adams Jr. (for the middle district of Florida) rejected Landstar’s arguments concerning the private right of action, as well as the carrier’s arguments that the court could not order the payment of damages, that the statute of limitations was only two years instead of four years as argued by OOIDA, and that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration had primary jurisdiction over suits by owner-operators against motor carriers under the leasing regulations. The court rejected all of these arguments, giving a clear victory to OOIDA.

This is the second major victory for OOIDA in its suit against Landstar. Earlier, the court rejected Landstar’s motion to require arbitration of owner-operator claims.

OOIDA President Jim Johnston expressed his satisfaction at the court’s rulings, saying he looked forward to OOIDA’s attorneys now taking full discovery of Landstar to prove its claims.

"These challenges to an owner-operator's private right of action and the jurisdiction of the court have now become nothing more than ineffective stalling maneuvers," Johnston said. "We are pleased this court has dispatched these arguments so quickly and that we can now move on to dealing with the merits of the case."

The court expects this case to be ready for trial in April 2005.