Corning hired Hyundai Merchant Marine (Hyundai) to ship its glass from Kentucky to Taiwan. Hyundai sub-contracted with several sub-contractors for road and rail carriage while Hyundai performed the sea carriage part. Hyundai issued an ocean bill of lading for the whole transit. The glass was destroyed accidentally by Hyundai’s sub-contractors during transit. Corning thereafter brought an action against Hyundai and its sub-contractors under the Carmack Amendment, alleging breach of contract, bailment, and negligence and seeking damages for cargo in the intermodal overseas shipment. The District Court held that COGSA/the Hague Rules did not apply, and Hyundai and the sub-contractors are liable to Corning for the loss. All parties appealed. The Court of Appeals was asked to decide whether the Carmack Amendment applied in this case.

Held: The Carmack Amendment applies only to shipments for which there is a receiving carrier required to issue a Carmack bill of lading - meaning, a road or rail carrier that is both subject to Surface Transportation Board (STB) jurisdiction and receiving cargo from the shipper at the journey’s point of origin.

Therefore, the Carmack Amendment did not apply in this case, because the two ‘extension’ clauses in the bills of lading - the clause paramount (contractually extending COGSA/the Hague Rules to the overland portions of the carriage) and the Himalaya clause (contractually extending COGSA/the Hague Rules to the rail carrier sub-contractor) - trumped the Carmack Amendment, rendered it wholly inapplicable and replaced it with COGSA/the Hague Rules.