Salling v. BUDGET RENT-A-CAR SYSTEMS, INC.
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 4072
| 6th Cir. | 2012Background
- Salling rented a Budget car at Cleveland airport and returned it there after driving 64 miles in one day.
- He was charged a $13.99 fuel service fee in addition to disputed rental fees.
- Salling sued in federal court as an individual and as a putative Class Action Fairness Act class representative for breach of contract, fraud, and unjust enrichment.
- Budget argued the fee issue turned on contract interpretation and that Salling voluntarily paid the fee, a defense the district court treated as applicable.
- The district court granted summary judgment to Budget on all three claims, and the district court’s ruling on the breach claim is the subject of Salling’s appeal.
- The Sixth Circuit affirmed, upheld the voluntary payment doctrine defense, and did not need to reach contract interpretation questions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Voluntary payment doctrine bars breach claim? | Salling argues the doctrine should not bar the breach claim on appeal. | Budget contends the voluntary payment doctrine bars recovery for unjust enrichment and related claims. | Voluntary payment doctrine bars the breach/unjust enrichment claims. |
| Was the doctrine properly preserved for appeal? | Salling argues the defense was raised sufficiently for appellate review. | Budget asserted the defense in its summary judgment briefing. | Courts addressed the merits for judicial economy; issue preserved for appeal. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hayes v. Equitable Energy Res. Co., 266 F.3d 560 (6th Cir.2001) (removal standards and jurisdictional proofs in diversity actions)
- Lexicon, Inc. v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 436 F.3d 662 (6th Cir.2006) (judicial economy allows addressing arguments raised in earlier stage of litigation)
- Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Flowers, 513 F.3d 546 (6th Cir.2008) (issue raised for the first time in response to summary judgment may be considered for economy)
- Kovacevich v. Kent State Univ., 224 F.3d 806 (6th Cir.2000) (district court may permit renewed or successive motions for summary judgment)
- Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. of Am. v. Hillerich & Bradsby Co., 598 F.3d 257 (6th Cir.2010) (arguments raised in reply brief may be deemed preserved for appeal under certain conditions)
- Nationwide Life Ins. Co. v. Myers, 67 Ohio App.2d 98, 425 N.E.2d 952 (Ohio App. 1980) (voluntary payment doctrine applies when payment is voluntary and not under fraud/duress)
- Scott v. Fairbanks Capital Corp., 284 F.Supp.2d 880 (S.D.Ohio 2003) (Ohio Supreme Court articulation of the voluntary payment doctrine)