RCC WESLEY CHAPEL CROSSING, LLC v. ALLEN
313 Ga. 69
Ga.2021Background
- On Feb. 5, 2018, Forrest Allen’s car was "booted" in a DeKalb County shopping‑center lot; State Impound charged $650 to remove the device and Allen paid.
- Allen sued the property owner/operator and tenants as a putative class (booted persons from 2013 to present) alleging negligence, premises liability, false imprisonment, conversion, and RICO, claiming defendants hired/authorized the booting vendor.
- The trial court certified the class, reasoning that placing a boot and refusing removal until payment is a lien and "liens must be statutory," so the legality of booting did not turn on each parker’s status on the property.
- Defendants appealed, arguing a landowner’s common‑law rights (including Reinertsen’s removal rule and distress damage feasant) permit immobilizing or impounding trespassing vehicles.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed; the Georgia Supreme Court granted certiorari and held there is no common‑law right to immobilize unauthorized vehicles, rejected application of distress damage feasant to cars, vacated the Court of Appeals judgment insofar as it relied on an incorrect legal premise about common‑law liens, and remanded for reconsideration of class certification under the correct law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does common law permit private owners to immobilize (boot) unauthorized vehicles? | Allen: No common‑law right; booting is wrongful detention. | Defendants: Yes; common‑law rights to remove trespassing chattels (Reinertsen) or impound under distress damage feasant authorize immobilization. | No common‑law right to immobilize vehicles; removal rule does not encompass booting; towing statute governs removal/impoundment. |
| Does distress damage feasant justify booting/impoundment of automobiles? | Allen: Doctrine inapplicable to cars. | Defendants: Distress damage feasant allows impounding trespassing property to secure damages. | Distress damage feasant is narrow, applies to livestock causing actual damage; not to automobiles whose owners are ascertainable; cannot justify booting here. |
| Is placing a boot a common‑law lien such that class certification does not depend on parker status? | Allen: Booting constitutes unlawful detention supporting common issues across the class. | Defendants/Trial court: Trial court held liens must be statutory, so no common‑law lien exists—supporting certification. | Trial court was wrong to state liens cannot exist at common law (distress is a common‑law lien), but that doctrine does not validate booting here; case remanded to reassess class certification applying correct law. |
Key Cases Cited
- Reinertsen v. Porter, 242 Ga. 624 (Ga. 1978) (recognizes common‑law right to remove chattels left on land with due care).
- Bonner v. DeLoach, 78 Ga. 50 (Ga. 1886) (discusses distress damage feasant as common‑law remedy requiring actual damage).
- King v. Ford, 70 Ga. 628 (Ga. 1883) (authorizes taking up and impounding cattle damage‑feasant).
- Thombley v. Hightower, 52 Ga. App. 716 (Ga. App. 1936) (landowner may recover for damages done by trespassing cattle).
- Yellow Cab Co. v. Thomas T. Hoskin Co., 215 Ill. App. 11 (Ill. App. 1919) (refuses to apply distress damage feasant to automobiles; owner ascertainable and risk of breach of peace).