Kozak v. Hillsborough County, Fla.
644 F.3d 1347
11th Cir.2011Background
- Kozak operates Gunny's Interstate Travel and Tours in Hillsborough County and uses a 15-passenger vehicle and a 7-passenger minivan.
- Hillsborough County Public Transportation Commission regulates local transportation and requires certificates and permits for each vehicle.
- Kozak did not obtain certificates or permits for either vehicle, despite the Commission's regulations.
- Kozak sued for declaratory and injunctive relief, contending that the regulations were preempted by 49 U.S.C. § 14501.
- The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the Commission, rejecting Kozak's preemption arguments.
- Kozak appeals pro se seeking reversal on preemption grounds under § 14501(a)(1)(C) and § 14501(c)(1).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preemption under §14501(a)(1)(C) for certificates | Kozak argues §14501(a)(1)(C) preempts the certificate requirement for his 15-passenger vehicle. | Commission argues no preemption as to intrastate charter transportation regulation. | Affirmed district court; not preempted. |
| Preemption under §14501(c)(1) for minivan rule | Kozak argues §14501(c)(1) preempts the luxury service rule affecting his minivan. | Rule does not meaningfully affect rates, routes, or services of property; no preemption. | Affirmed; Kozak not a motor carrier of property for preemption purposes. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dole Food Co. v. Patrickson, 538 U.S. 468 (2003) (statutory interpretation; avoid rendering term superfluous)
- Corley v. United States, 556 U.S. 303 (2009) (statutory construction principles; give effect to all provisions)
- Shotz v. City of Plantation, 344 F.3d 1161 (11th Cir. 2003) (interpretation of statutory divisions and harmony among provisions)
- Chappell v. Chao, 388 F.3d 1373 (11th Cir. 2004) (agency preemption analysis; may affirm for different reasons)