Zurich goes after carrier after bridge strike damages cargo

Insurer says contract spelled out exactly what cargo coverage the trucker had to carry

Zurich goes after carrier after bridge strike damages cargo

Zurich is suing a Pennsylvania trucker after a driver allegedly took the wrong lane under a bridge - and damaged a Power Circuit Breaker.

Zurich American Insurance Company filed the complaint on April 30, 2026, in the Southern District of New York, standing in the shoes of its insured, Hitachi Energy USA, Inc. The insurer wants $114,033.68 from Reinsfelder, Inc., plus interest and costs from August 25, 2025.

The setup, according to the filing: Hitachi hired Reinsfelder in January 2023 to move freight, and tapped the carrier to haul a Power Circuit Breaker and parts from Mt. Pleasant, Pennsylvania to a Salt River Project site in Tempe, Arizona. The driver picked up the cargo on or about August 23, 2025, the complaint says, without flagging any issues.

Then it went sideways. On or about August 28, 2025, Reinsfelder emailed Hitachi to report that the driver "had chosen to drive under the wrong lane of a certain bridge during transit," the complaint states. The lane was too low for the load. The cargo took significant damage.

The breaker went back to the manufacturer, which pegged repairs at $118,652.55, according to the complaint. Zurich's adjuster, WK Webster, settled the claim at $114,033.68 - the value of the parts purchased for repair, minus Hitachi's $25,000 deductible. Zurich paid out $89,033.68 and now wants the carrier to cover the loss.

For insurers and claims professionals, the contract language is the part worth sitting with. Clause 8 of the 2023 transportation contract didn't just say Reinsfelder needed cargo insurance - it set the floor. The carrier had to keep cargo insurance "in amounts not less than $250,000 per occurrence," cover its own deductibles, and ensure that "CARRIER's insurance shall be primary and respond and pay prior to any other available coverage."

That clause anchors Zurich's fourth cause of action. The complaint alleges Reinsfelder "failed to procure cargo insurance coverage for the benefit of Plaintiff" and "failed to procure cargo insurance coverage which was primary to any insurance coverage available to Plaintiff." It rides alongside three other counts: breach of common carriage under the Carmack Amendment, the federal law governing cargo claims against motor carriers; negligence; and breach of contract. Each seeks the same $114,033.68, plus interest and costs from August 25, 2025.

The allegations have not been tested in court. Reinsfelder has not filed a response, and no court has ruled.

Related Stories

Keep up with the latest news and events

Join our mailing list, it’s free!