Dan’s City Used Cars, Inc. v. Pelkey (2013)
Citation: 569 U.S. 251 (2013) · Decided: May 13, 2013. Full primary opinion reviewed; source-host and later-treatment boundaries appear below.
Facts and posture
Pelkey alleged that a tow operator stored his car after a landlord-requested tow while he was seriously ill, received notice that he wanted to pay and reclaim it, held an auction attracting no bidders, then traded it away without returning proceeds. He asserted NH Consumer Protection Act and statutory/common-law bailment claims. The trial court granted federal-preemption summary judgment; NH Supreme Court reversed. These are allegations and procedural facts, not a merits finding of fraud or liability. Dan’s City.
Holding and disposition
The unanimous Court affirmed. Section 14501(c)(1) did not preempt these state-law damages claims over storage/disposal after towing ended. The claims concerned neither transportation of property nor a motor carrier’s relevant transportation service: the movement had ended, and permanent storage/disposal was different from storage in transit. The Court did not define transportation service for every purpose. Dan’s City.
Reasoning and rejected arguments
Broad ‘related to’ wording did not erase the additional transportation-of-property limitation. The listed statutory exceptions did not expand the preemption clause to everything outside an exception. The operator also could not invoke NH’s disposal framework to authorize a sale while claiming preemption eliminated remedies for violating that framework; federal law supplied no replacement disposition/remedy system. See pages 260–265. Dan’s City.
Limits and current statute
Footnote 2 separates the statute applicable to 2007 events from later amendments. Footnote 5 expressly declines to decide whether a chapter 262 violation establishes a NH Consumer Protection Act violation. Neither ultimate damages liability, a universal notice clock, nor purchaser title was adjudicated. Current age/value/notice rules must come from the current RSA 262 body, not old quotations in this opinion. Dan’s City; RSA 262; RSA 358-A.
Subsequent treatment and status
An actual 2026 Supreme Court treatment source was retrieved: Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, 608 U.S. 219, 226–227 (May 14, 2026), cites Dan’s City’s reading of ‘with respect to’ when applying the separate motor-vehicle-safety exception to negligent-hiring claims. That is affirmative later reliance on the interpretive proposition, not an appellate adjudication of Pelkey’s eventual state-law liability or a comprehensive citator certificate. The complete Dan’s City holding is verified; the treatment search is bounded to the identified retrieved opinions/docket and current statutory reconciliation. Montgomery (2026); Dan’s City.
Practical impact
Federal motor-carrier preemption does not itself excuse post-tow disposal noncompliance. Verify the current statutory route and actual notice/proceeds evidence; do not describe the Supreme Court’s decision as a buyer-title judgment. Dan’s City; RSA 262.
Applies in →
Legal information, not legal advice. Verify the applicable current law and case-specific record before acting.