932 N.W.2d 423
Wis. Ct. App.2019Background
- Town of Delafield posted a seasonal six-ton weight restriction on certain roads during spring thaw (posted Mar 4, 2016).
- Three days later, a Central Transport semi-truck exceeding six tons drove on a restricted Town road, became stuck, and was towed; Central Transport was cited under the Town ordinance adopting Wis. Stat. § 348.17(1).
- Central Transport moved to dismiss, arguing the Town’s application of the weight restriction denied "reasonable access" between the Interstate and a terminal, which is preempted by the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (49 U.S.C. § 31114(a)) and FHWA regulation 23 C.F.R. § 658.19.
- At trial the Town’s highway superintendent testified the restriction is temporary (about a week in 2016), is based on road vulnerability during thaw, and the Town routinely issues temporary permits with specified routes; he had never denied a permit in his tenure.
- The circuit court dismissed the citation, finding federal law preempted the Town restriction; the appellate court reviewed preemption de novo.
Issues
| Issue | Central Transport's Argument | Town of Delafield's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Town's seasonal weight restriction, as applied, is preempted by the STAA because it denies "reasonable access" between the Interstate and a terminal | The restriction denied all reasonable access and thus conflicts with 49 U.S.C. § 31114(a) | The restriction allows reasonable access via a straightforward permit process and designated routes; it is temporary and targeted to protect roads | The court held no preemption: the Town’s practice (temporary limits plus permit exception) provided reasonable access and did not conflict with § 31114(a) |
| Whether a carrier’s failure to seek the Town’s permitting option excuses violation | Carrier argued Town failed to provide adequate information, so it was effectively denied access | Town showed public posting (signs, website) and routine permit availability; carriers are expected to check local restrictions | The court rejected carrier’s excuse: not attempting to secure a permit did not excuse the statutory violation |
Key Cases Cited
- Aux Sable Liquid Prods. v. Murphy, 526 F.3d 1028 (7th Cir. 2008) (denial of all access violates § 31114; factual comparison where combined restrictions eliminated access)
- A.B.F. Freight Sys., Inc. v. Suthard, 681 F. Supp. 334 (E.D. Va. 1988) (permanent, cumbersome permitting process that denied timely access violates § 31114)
- New Hampshire Motor Transp. Ass'n v. Town of Plaistow, 67 F.3d 326 (1st Cir. 1995) (local restrictions permissible so long as reasonable access is preserved)
- Consolidated Freightways Corp. v. Larson, 647 F. Supp. 1479 (M.D. Pa. 1986) (discusses lack of uniform definition of "reasonable access")
- Partenfelder v. Rohde, 356 Wis. 2d 492 (Wis. 2014) (explains preemption doctrines and standard of review for preemption questions)