- 74 -
274(n) limitation”. Regardless of what TLC’s practice and
intention with respect to the section 274(n)(1) limitation might
have been, that practice and that intention were not made part of
the exclusive lease agreement between TLC and each trucking
company client. Indeed, the Court in Transport Labor I found
(1) that there were no agreements between TLC and any trucking
company client other than the agreement set forth in the
exclusive lease agreement and (2) that the exclusive lease
agreement was silent as to the section 274(n)(1) limitation. Id.
at 159 n.9, 171 n.20. If there had been an agreement that each
trucking company client was to be subject to the section
274(n)(1) limitation, such agreement would have been reflected in
the exclusive lease agreement that TLC entered into with each
trucking company client or some other written document signed by
each such trucking company client.49
Petitioner asserts that the Court disregarded Mr. DeBerg’s
49Sec. fifteen of each exclusive lease agreement provides:
No waiver or modification of this Agreement or of
any covenant, condition or limitation herein contained
shall be valid unless in writing and duly executed by
the party to be charged therewith, and no evidence of
any waiver or modification shall be offered or received
in evidence of any proceeding, arbitration or litiga-
tion between the parties hereto arising out of or
affecting this Agreement, or the rights or obligations
of the parties, hereunder unless such waiver or modifi-
cation is in writing, duly executed as aforesaid, and
the parties further agree that the provisions of this
Section may not be waived except as herein set forth.
Page: Previous 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011