Cindy Thayer v. Randy Marion Chevrolet Buick Cadillac, LLC
30f4th1290
| 11th Cir. | 2022Background
- Randy Marion Chevrolet Buick Cadillac (Randy Marion), a North Carolina car dealership with a service department, routinely provides dealership-owned vehicles to customers whose cars are left for service.
- Samuel and Rebecca Pope (the Popes) left their car for service on Sept. 4, 2015; Randy Marion provided a dealership vehicle which the Popes used on their honeymoon.
- On Sept. 13, 2015, the Popes, driving the dealership vehicle in Florida, collided with Cindy Thayer, who sued Randy Marion under Florida’s dangerous instrumentality doctrine.
- Randy Marion moved for summary judgment invoking the Graves Amendment, 49 U.S.C. § 30106; the district court granted summary judgment, finding Randy Marion owned the vehicle, was in the business of leasing, and that the vehicle was “rented or leased” because the Popes provided consideration by presenting their car for paid service.
- Thayer appealed only two aspects: (1) whether the vehicle was rented or leased under the Graves Amendment, and (2) whether inconsistent labeling as a “rental” versus a “loaner” created a genuine dispute of material fact.
- The Eleventh Circuit affirmed, holding the substance of the transaction (consideration exchanged) controls and the Graves Amendment applied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the dealership “rents or leases” the vehicle for purposes of the Graves Amendment | Thayer: No rental/lease—no specific payment for the vehicle; label and context indicate a gratuitous loaner | Randy Marion: Yes—customer provided consideration (opportunity to service and payment for repairs) in exchange for use of the vehicle | The court held the exchange of consideration (bringing car for paid service) sufficed; vehicle was rented/leased and Graves Amendment applies |
| Whether calling the vehicle a “rental” and a “loaner” precludes summary judgment | Thayer: Inconsistent labels create a triable issue of fact | Randy Marion: Labels irrelevant; substance of transaction controls | The court held labels do not control; substance (consideration) governs and no material factual dispute existed |
Key Cases Cited
- Garcia v. Vanguard Car Rental USA, Inc., 540 F.3d 1242 (11th Cir. 2008) (Graves Amendment preempts Florida dangerous instrumentality doctrine)
- Shuford v. Fidelity Nat’l Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 508 F.3d 1337 (11th Cir. 2007) (summary judgment standard and review)
- United States v. DBB, Inc., 180 F.3d 1277 (11th Cir. 1999) (statutory interpretation begins with statutory text)
- United States v. Frank, 599 F.3d 1221 (11th Cir. 2010) (interpret statutory words using their ordinary meaning)
- Aurbach v. Gallina, 753 So. 2d 60 (Fla. 2000) (describing Florida’s dangerous instrumentality doctrine)