Title: Sammons v. American Auto. Ass'n

State: wyoming

Issuer: Wyoming Supreme Court

Document:

Sammons v. American Auto. Ass'n1996 WY 27912 P.2d 1103Case Number: 95-177Decided: 03/06/1996Supreme Court of Wyoming

DONALD L. SAMMONS, d/b/a Lone Tree Truck & 
Travel,  

Appellant (Defendant), 

 

v. 

 

AMERICAN AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION, a Connecticut 
Corporation,  

Appellee (Plaintiff).

 

Appeal 
from the District Court of Albany County; 

Honorable 
Arthur T. Hanscum, Judge.

 

Representing 
Appellant: 

Rodger McDaniel, Cheyenne.

 Representing 
Appellee: 

S. Gregory Thomas of Patton & Davison, 
Cheyenne.

 

Before GOLDEN, C.J., and 
THOMAS, MACY, TAYLOR and LEHMAN, JJ.

GOLDEN, Chief 
Justice. 

[¶1]      Following the 
American Automobile Association's (AAA) petition, the district court permanently 
enjoined Appellant Donald Sammons (Sammons) from charging an access fee to its 
business invitees who use AAA towing services. Sammons appeals the order on the 
grounds that requiring him to permit AAA to tow customers from his property 
interferes with his property rights.

 

[¶2]      We 
affirm.

 

ISSUES

 

[¶3]      Sammons presents 
these issues:

 

Issue No. 1. Does the American Automobile 
[Association] acquire the right to use Appellant's land when it enters into 
contracts with third parties obligating itself to provide road services to those 
persons?

 

Issue No. 2. If the Appellant business invites the 
public onto its property to provide a certain service, is it compelled to allow 
competitors to use its property to provide that service to customers who choose 
a competitor over the Appellant?

 

Issue No. 3. Does the status of a customer of the 
Appellant as a business invitee entitle the customer to invite Appellant's 
competitors onto his property to conduct business?

 

Issue No. 4. Is the Appellant property owner entitled 
to charge competitors a reasonable access fee to use his property to provide 
services to its customers?

 

[¶4]      AAA presents this 
issue:

 

Whether the District [Court] erred as a matter of law 
when it entered summary judgment in favor of Appellee American Automobile 
Association on Appellee's claim for permanent injunction.

 

FACTS

 

[¶5]      As the district 
court found, the facts in this case are not in dispute. Lone Tree Truck and 
Travel is a convenience store and service station with a tow truck operation 
owned by Sammons and located in Buford, Wyoming, on Interstate 80. It is the 
only convenience store and service station between Cheyenne and Laramie. AAA is 
a nationally known corporation which provides, among other things, roadside 
assistance and towing services to its members in return for a paid membership 
fee. AAA provides this service by contracting with tow truck operators 
throughout the country. AAA currently has seven contracts with tow truck 
operations in Laramie County and two in Albany County. Sammons has applied to be 
designated as an AAA authorized towing operation, but to date he has been denied 
an AAA contract.

 

[¶6]      This denial 
resulted in conflict between the two parties and, as the district court found, 
the conflict has escalated over time from letter writing to confrontations 
between Sammons and AAA tow services and customers. In the spring of 1994, 
Sammons notified AAA that if it wanted to use his property to conduct AAA 
business, it would be required to pay an access fee of $25.00 per use. In the 
event Lone Tree Truck & Travel would receive an AAA contract, no access fee 
would be charged. On March 9, 1994, AAA dispatched a wrecker to provide service 
to one of its members whose automobile was disabled at Lone Tree Truck & 
Travel. Sammons informed the operator that the access fee had to be paid. The 
operator refused and the customer paid the fee in order to have his automobile 
towed from Sammons' property. On April 19, 1994, Sammons gave AAA written 
notification that the access fee was being increased to $50.00. AAA continued to 
dispatch operators to Lone Tree Truck & Travel and refused to pay the access 
fee.

 

[¶7]      On June 3, 1994, 
AAA dispatched a wrecker to Lone Tree Truck & Travel to repair a member's 
vehicle. During this incident, the Albany County Sheriff was called to the scene 
by Sammons. The sheriff's officer issued a warning to the parties. A few days 
later AAA filed for an injunction. The district court granted AAA's motion for 
summary judgment and issued an injunction against Sammons.

 

DISCUSSION

 

[¶8]      This case 
presents a question of law concerning the property rights of a business. 
Questions of law are reviewed de 
novo. Lucero v. Mathews, 901 P.2d 1115, 1118 (Wyo. 1995). Sammons contends his ownership of the property gives him 
the right to exclude AAA or charge it an access fee. AAA contends property 
rights are diminished when the owner invites the public onto his 
property.

 

[¶9]      Ownership of 
property implies the right of possession and control and includes the right to 
exclude others; that is, a true owner of land exercises full dominion and 
control over it and possesses the right to expel trespassers. PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robins, 447 U.S. 74, 82, 100 S. Ct. 2035, 2041, 64 L. Ed. 2d 741 (1980). In Wyoming, the right 
to protect property is a state constitutional right. Cross v. State, 370 P.2d 371, 377 (Wyo. 
1962). Given that exclusive possession is a fundamental element of property 
ownership, the question then is whether that right is affected when a business 
gives its consent to the public to enter upon its premises for business 
purposes.

 

[¶10]   The United States Supreme Court has 
said that property does not "lose its private character merely because the 
public is generally invited to use it for designated purposes." Lloyd Corp., Ltd., v. Tanner, 407 U.S. 551, 569, 92 S. Ct. 2219, 2229, 33 L. Ed. 2d 131 (1972). However, possessory 
property rights or authority may be extended to tenants, lessees, licensees, or 
invitees. State v. Scholberg, 395 N.W.2d 454, 456 (Minn.App. 1986). An invitation by a business to the public to 
enter its premises for business purposes constitutes a license to the public. State v. Quinnell, 277 Minn. 63, 151 N.W.2d 598, 602 (1967); Mosher v. Cook 
United, Inc., 62 Ohio St.2d 316, 405 N.E.2d 720, 721 
(1980).

 

[¶11]   A license is a privilege to do 
certain acts of a temporary character on the land of another which is revocable 
at the will of a licensor unless a definite time has been specified, or unless 
it is coupled with an interest. Coumas v. 
Transcontinental Garage, 68 Wyo. 99, 230 P.2d 748, 758 (1951). A license 
does not give any interest in the land, but means that one who possesses a 
license is not a trespasser. Anthony 
Wilkinson Live Stock Co. v. McIlquam, 14 Wyo. 209, 226-27, 83 P. 364, 369 
(1905); Metcalf v. Hart, 3 Wyo. 513, 
527, 27 P. 900, 905 (1891). A license may be created by parol, a writing, or can 
be implied from the acts of the parties, from their relations, and from usage 
and custom. Kendrick v. Healy, 27 
Wyo. 123, 148, 192 P. 601, 610 (1920). Usually, an implied license is terminable 
at will. See Coach House Restaurant, Inc. 
v. Coach and Six Restaurants, Inc., 934 F.2d 1551, 1563 (11th Cir. 1991); 
cf. Sarfaty v. Evangelist, 142 A.D.2d 995, 530 N.Y.S.2d 417, 418 (4 Dept. 1988) (unless the conduct of the licensor 
makes it inequitable to permit licensor to revoke 
license).

 

[¶12]   In revoking the license of one who 
has entered upon land, the licensor must give the licensee a reasonable 
opportunity to remove himself and his effects from the land. 5 RESTATEMENT OF 
PROPERTY § 519, 3133-36 (1944). Although a license has been revoked, the 
licensee must be given a reasonable opportunity to leave and during that time is 
not a trespasser. The licensee's presence on the land while leaving it with 
reasonable promptness and in a reasonable manner is privileged, as against the 
possessor. RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS 2d § 176 (1965). Further, the 
Restatements explain that a licensee has a reasonable amount of time to remove 
his personal property from the land.

 

If the possessor consents to the presence on the land 
of a thing which is to be removed at some time thereafter, and if such consent 
is terminated or suspended, one entitled to the immediate possession of the 
thing is privileged as against such possessor . . . to be on the land at a 
reasonable time for the purpose of removing the thing in a reasonable manner and 
with reasonable promptness, unless he knows or has reason to know the time of 
such termination or suspension a reasonable period in 
advance.

 

Steiger v. Burroughs, 878 P.2d 131, 136 (Colo. App. 1994) (quoting 
RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS 2d § 177 (1965).

 

[¶13]   As noted in the comments to 
RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS 2d § 177, the scope of the privilege extends to 
the bringing of such assistants and appliances as are reasonably necessary for 
removal of personal property on the possessor's land. RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF 
TORTS 2d § 177 cmt. d (1965). What constitutes a reasonable time for removal 
will depend upon circumstances such as the size and condition of the object, 
weather, the facilities available, and the amount of time given as notice that 
the license has been revoked. Steiger, 878 P.2d  at 136; RESTATEMENT 
(SECOND) OF TORTS § 177, cmt. e (1965).

 

[¶14]   In this case, it is clear that 
Sammons has invited motorists onto his property for the purposes of selling 
services, repairs, and products to them. He has impliedly consented to business 
invitees and their vehicles entering onto his premises for these purposes, 
conferring a license which he may revoke at will. Upon revocation of the 
license, however, motorists retain the privilege of reasonable egress and 
removal of their personal property in a reasonable manner. Motorists retain the 
privilege of contacting another towing company to assist them to remove their 
vehicles in a reasonable amount of time and in a reasonable manner and Sammons 
has no right to interfere.

[¶15]   Because AAA may enter and remove 
the property of a licensee at the licensee's request, it follows that, absent 
contract, Sammons may not charge an access fee to AAA or to the licensee. The 
district court's order granting summary judgment to AAA and issuing an 
injunction is affirmed.