Action Towing, Inc. v. the Mint Leasing, Inc.
451 S.W.3d 525
Tex. App.2014Background
- Mint Leasing owned the 2008 Pontiac leased to Albert and Anita Martinez; the vehicle was towed to Action Towing's storage facility after nonpayment
- Action stored the vehicle, sent towing/storage invoices to Mint and the lien holder, and ultimately sold the vehicle at public auction when charges remained unpaid
- Mint sued Action for conversion and civil theft under the Theft Liability Act, alleging no valid lien existed and possession was wrongful
- Action asserted a FAAAA preemption defense, arguing mint claims were preempted and that it qualified as a broker under §14501(c)
- Mint moved for summary judgment on liability; the trial court granted Mint summary judgment, concluding no preemption, and later awarded damages; Action appealed
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does FAAAA preemption apply to Mint’s state-law claims? | Mint asserts Dan’s City governs; preemption does not apply | Action contends preemption applies and requires proof of non-applicability of exceptions | No preemption; Dan’s City controls; Mint prevails on preemption |
Key Cases Cited
- Dan’s City Used Cars, Inc. v. Pelkey, 133 S. Ct. 1769 (Supreme Court (2013)) (storage/disposal claims after towing not preempted; post-transportation conduct falls outside §14501(c)(1))
- Rowe v. N.H. Motor Transp. Ass’n, 552 U.S. 364 (Supreme Court (2008)) (limits preemption to burdens on interstate commerce; not telegraphed in this case)
- City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (summary judgment standard; authoritative guide for burden-shifting)