49 C.F.R. §391.11 - GENERAL QUALIFICATIONS OF DRIVERS

Cite as49 C.F.R. §391.11
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
110 cases
  • Txi Transp. Co. v. Hughes, 2-04-242-CV.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas
    • May 24, 2007
    ...driver's license [Rodriguez indicated he was a U.S. resident] and the applicant is a resident of a foreign jurisdiction); see also 49 C.F.R. § 391.11(b)(5) (2005) (requiring motor carrier driver to have valid commercial driver's license). Bensmiller testified that "Mr. Rodriguez did not hav......
  • Sandoval v. Hagan, Civ.A. 96-D-1875-N.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 11th Circuit. Middle District of Alabama
    • January 1, 1999
    ...signs and to understand the directions of law enforcement officers," see Exhibit H, is not irrational. The belief dovetails with 49 C.F.R. § 391.11(b)(2)'s focus on the Page 1301 of traffic signs and signals and responding to official inquiries. (Defs.' Reply at 10.) The court notes that th......
  • Williams v. J.B. Hunt Transp., Inc., Civ. A. H–13–2510.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. United States District Courts. 5th Circuit. Southern District of Texas
    • September 22, 2015
    ...§ 391.1. Hensley v. United Parcel Service, Inc., No. 1:13–CV–101–MR–DSC, 2014 WL 903166, at *3 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 7, 2014). Pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 391.11, "a motor carrier shall not ... permit a person to drive a commercial motor vehicle unless that person is qualified to "drive" under the phy......
  • Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n v. Celadon Trucking Servs., Inc., 1:12-cv-00275-SEB-TAB
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of Indiana)
    • June 30, 2015
    ...not produced a copy of a doctor's certificate indicating they are physically qualified for the position under DOT safety regulations. 49 C.F.R. §§ 391.11(a), 391.41(a)(1); Bay, 212 F.3d at 973. The six claimants here must therefore show that they met the requirements imposed by these DOT re......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
3 provisions

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT