# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 6- 36 36

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
Pari s Li m ou si ne of Ok la ho m a, LLC

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt

v.

Exe cu ti ve Co ach Bu il de rs , Inc

.

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll ee

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - Sp rin gf ie ld

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Apri l 5 , 20 17 Fil ed : Au gu st 7, 2 01 7

__ __ __ __ __ __
Befo re GRUENDER, MURPHY, an d KELLY, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __
KELLY, Cir cu it Ju dg e.

Pari s Lim ou si ne of Okl ah om a (Par is L im ousi ne ) br ough t sui t ag ai nst Exe cu ti ve Co ach Bu il de rs (Exe cu ti ve Co ach ), al le gi ng th at li m o u s in es it pu rch as ed fro m Ex ecu ti ve Co ach were in br each of warra nt y

. The di st ric t co ur t di sm i s s e d t h e

co m pl ai nt , co nc lu di ng th at Pari s Lim ou si ne was im pr op erl y at te m

pt in g to en fo rce th eFed eral Mo to r Veh i c l e S a f et y St an da rd s (FM VSS) vi a a warra nt y act io n. Pari s Lim ou si ne ap pe al s, an d we r ev ers e.

I. Ba ck gr ou nd

Bec au se th is ap pe al ari se s fro m th e gr an t of a m ot io n to di sm is s, th e fo ll owi ng fact s are dr awn so le ly fro m th e co m pl ai nt

. See Zut z v. Nels on , 60 1 F

. 3 d 8 4 2
, 84 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ). Exe cu ti ve Co ach is in th e bu si ne ss of co nv ert in g st an da rd ve hi cl es in to li m ou si ne s. Pari s Lim ou si ne pu rch as ed ni ne li m ou si ne s fro m Exe cu ti ve Co ach
th at it all eg es are i n b reac h o f warra nt y be cau se th ey

are o ve rwei gh t. 1

Acco rd in g to th e co m

pl ai nt , Exe cu ti ve Co ach ex pr es sl y warra nt ed to Pari s Lim ou si ne th at it s li m ou si ne s co m pl ie d wit h al l ap pl ic ab le FMVSS

. The li m ou si ne s 2

so ld to Pari s Lim ou si ne do no t co m pl y wit h th e fed eral st an da rd s be cau se th ei r act ua l weig ht s are gr eat er th an th e weig ht rat in gs in di cat ed on th e F M V S S

- r e qu ire d la be l
th at Exe cu ti ve Co ach affi xe d to th e ve hi cl es

. As a res ul t, th e ni ne li m ou si ne s are no t
pr op erl y cert ifi ed an d su ffer f ro m sa fet y ha zard s as so ci at ed wit h ov erl oa di ng

. To

rem ed y th e ov erl oa di ng an d br in g th e ve hi cl es in to co m pl ia nc e wit h th e FMVSS
, th e li m ou si ne s n eed to be ph y si cal ly m od ifi ed

.

The co m pl ai nt st at es cl ai m s fo r (1 ) vi ol at io n of th e Mag nu so n- Mo ss W arra nt y 1 Act, 15 U.S. C

. § 23 01
, et se q. ; (2 ) br each of ex pr es s warra nt y ; an d (3 ) br each of im pl ie d warra nt y

. Alt ho ug h Pari s Lim ou si ne st at es th at it ap pe al s th e di sm is sa l of it s

ex pr es s an d im

pl ie d warra nt y cl ai m s, it s arg um en ts on ap pe al ad dr es s on ly th e

ex pr es s war ran ty clai m . W e th us li m it ou r op in io n t o t ha t cl ai m

.
Exe cu ti ve Co ach di d no t ch al le ng e th is co nt en ti on at t he di st ric t co ur t or on 2
ap pe al

. Bec au se th e pa rti es an d th e di st ric t co ur t as su m ed th at Exe cu ti ve Co ach

ex pr es sl y warra nt ed th at it s li m ou si ne s co m pl ie d wit h th e FMVSS
, we pr oc eed fro m th at ass um

pt io n a s wel l.

-2

-Exe cu ti ve Co ach m ov ed to di sm is s th e co m pl ai nt , arg ui ng , in te r al ia , th at Pari s Lim ou si ne fai le d to al le ge da m ag es an d th e su it was an im pr op er at te m

pt to en fo rce th e FMVSS

. Alt ho ug h it fo un d th e da m ag es al le ga ti on s su ffi ci en t, th e di st ric t co ur t di sm is se d t he co m

pl ai nt , con cl ud in g t ha t Pa ris Lim ou si ne co ul d no t us e a warr an ty
act io n to en fo rce st at ut or y sa fet y st an d a r d s th at pr ov id e no pr iv at e rig ht of act io n. The di st ric t co ur t al so de ni ed Pa r i s Lim ou si ne ’s m ot io n fo r reco ns id erat io n, ag ai n ho ld in g th at th e F M V S S can no t be th e ba si s of a warra nt y cl ai m

. Pari s Lim ou si ne
ap pe al s th e di st ric t co ur t’s g r a n t of th e di sm is sa l m ot io n an d it s de ni al of th e

reco ns id erat io n m ot io n. W e rev ie w de no vo th e gr an t of a m ot io n to di sm is s, bu t we wil l r ev ers e a de ni al of a m ot io n fo r reco ns id erat io n on ly fo r a cl ear ab us e of di sc ret io n. See Hall qu is t v. Uni te d Hom e Loa ns , In c., 71 5 F.3 d 10 40
, 10 44 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 ). Bec au se we fin d th at th e di st ric t co ur t erre d in gr an ti ng th e m ot io n to di sm is s, we do no t ad dr es s ar gu m en ts rel at ed to th e rec on si de rat io n m ot io n.

II . Dis cus si on

The FMVSS are p ro m

ul ga te d b y

th e Dep art m en t of T ran sp or ta ti on un de r th e

au th or it y of th e Nati on al Traffi c an d Mo to r Veh ic le Safe ty Act of 19 66 (Saf et y Act)
, 15 U.S.C. § 13 81
, et se q

. See Geie r v. Am

. Hon da Mo to r Co
., 52 9 U.S. 86 1, 86 4– 65 (2 00 0)

. The pa rti es ag ree th at th e Safe ty Act co nt ai ns no pr iv at e rig ht of act io n to

en fo rce th e FMVSS

. See Ay res v. Gen

. Mo to rs Co rp ., 23 4 F.3 d 51 4, 52 4 (1 1t h Ci r. 20 00 ). Exec ut iv e Co ach arg ue s t ha t t he co m pl ai nt was pr op erl y di sm is se d b ecau se Pari s Lim ou si ne can no t us e a warra nt y cl ai m to crea te a pr iv at e rig ht o f a c t i o n t o

en fo rce t he lab el in g re qu ire m en ts of t he FMVSS

.

A ss um in g th at Exe cu ti ve Co ach ex pr es sl y warra nt ed th at it s li m ou si n e s

co m pl ie d wit h th e FMVSS
, it s warra nt y ob li ga ti on s are in de pe nd en t of an y st at ut or y ob li ga ti on s im

po se d by th e Safe ty Act or th e FMVSS

. Co ng res s m ad e cl ear th at th e Safe ty Act do es “ no t es t ab li sh or affe ct a warra nt y ob li ga ti on un de r a la w of th e Uni te d St at es or a St at e. A rem ed y un de r [th e Safe ty Act]

. . . is in ad di ti on to ot he r

-3

-rig ht s an d reme d ie s un de r ot he r la ws of th e Uni te d St at es or a St at e.” 49 U.S.C.

§ 30 10 3( d)

. Pari s Lim ou si ne br ou gh t it s ex pr es s warra nt y cl ai m un de r Mi ss ou ri la w, whi ch au th or iz es pr iv at e en fo rcem en t act io ns fo r br each es of ex pr es s warra nt ie s. See
M o

. A n n

. St at

. §§ 40 0.2 -3 13
, 40 0.2 -7 14

. The Safe ty Act an d th e FMVSS do no t affe ct Exe cu ti ve Co ach ’s po te nt ia l li ab il it y un de r Mi ss ou ri la w fo r br each of it s

ex pr e s s w a r r an ty. See Fab ia n v. Fu lm er Helm et s, In c., 62 8 F.3 d 27 8, 28 1– 82 (6 th Ci r. 20 10 ) ( r e

jecti ng de fen da nt ’s arg um en t th at th e pl ai nt iff “ can no t do in di rect ly wha t he cann ot do di rect ly by co uc hi ng hi s p riv at e eff

or ts to en fo rce th e pr ov is io ns of th e Safe ty Act as st at e la w m is rep res en ta ti on cl ai m s” be cau se th e cl ai m s were

au th or iz ed un de r st at e la w an d th us th e pl ai nt iff “ ha s no ne ed fo r, an d th us ne ed no t in vo ke , a pr iv at e ri gh t o f act io n u nd er t he Safe ty A ct ”).

Exe c u t i v e Co ach rel ie s on Ast ra USA, In c. v. San ta Cl ara Co un ty, 56 3 U.S.
11 0 (20 11 ), to arg ue th at , reg ard le ss of th e th eo ry pl ead ed in th e co m pl ai nt , su it s to

en fo rce th e FMVSS are ba rred be cau se th ey are an im pr op er at te m

pt to crea te a
pr iv at e rig ht of act io n. B u t A s t r a do es no t he lp Exe cu ti ve Co ach

. Tha t cas e

co nc ern ed th e Pu bl ic Heal th Serv ic es Act— a st at ut e th at do es no t co nt ai n a pr ov is io n

co m pa rab le to 49 U.S.C. § 30 10 3( d) th at ex pr es sl y al lo ws pa rti es to pu rs ue rem ed ie s ba se d o n war ran ti es . See As tra , 56 3 U.S. at 11 7– 22

.

On ap pe al
, Exe cu ti ve Co ach al so ap pe ars to a r gu e th at Pari s Lim ou si ne ’s

warra nt y act io n sh ou l d b e di sm is se d du e to co nf li ct pr eem

pt io n. Perh ap s be cau se Exe cu ti ve Co ach di d no t rai se th is arg um en t un ti l it s rep ly br ie f, th e di st ric t co ur t di d

no t ru le on it
, an d “ we do no t no rm al ly co ns id er is su es whi ch th e di st ric t co ur t di d no t

ru le up on .” Bea rd en v. Lem on , 47 5 F.3 d 92 6, 92 9– 30 (8 th Ci r. 20 07 ) (q uo ti ng Fi rs t Uni on Nat’l Ban k v. Pi ct et Ove rs eas Tr. C or p., 35 1 F .3d 81 0, 8 16 (8t h Ci r. 20 03 )). To the ex te nt th at th e arg um en t is pro pe rly be fo re us, we fin d th at Exe cu ti ve Co ach
ha s no t m et it s bu rd en t o de m on st rat e th at co nf li ct pr eem

pt io n ap pl ie s: It ha s no t sh own th at it is im

po ss ib le to co m

pl y wit h i ts warran ty obl ig at io n a nd th e FMVS S,

no r ha s it es ta bl is he d th at it s warra nt y ob li ga ti on “ st an ds as an ob st acl e” to th e

-4

-ob

jecti ve s of th e Safe ty Act or th e FMVSS

. Ge i e r, 52 9 U.S. at 87 3– 74 (in te rn al

qu ot at io n om it te d) ; W il li am s v. Nat’l Fo ot ba ll Leag ue , 5 82 F.3 d 86 3, 88 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ) (b ur de n is on pa rty as se rti ng fed eral pr eem pt io n of st at e la w); se e al so Fab ia n, 62 8 F.3 d at 28 2– 83 (h ol di ng th at co m m on la w m is rep re s e n t at io n cl ai m s were no t
pr eem pt ed be cau se th ey

di d n ot co nf

li ct wit h a FMVSS ).

Fi na ll y , Exe cu ti ve Co ach a r g u e s th at th e co m pl ai nt sh ou ld be di sm is se d be cau se Pari s Lim ou si ne fai le d to al le ge le ga ll y co gn iz ab le da m ag es

. The di st ric t

co ur t reject ed th is arg um en t, co nc lu di ng th at th e co m p l a i nt “ is reas on ab ly read to al le ge th at it can no t ob ta in th e fu ll us e an d be ne fit of th e v e h ic le s it pu rch as ed be cau se of th e su pp os ed de fect s.” W e ag ree wit h th e di st ric t co ur t. Pari s Lim ou si ne al le ge d th at it di d no t rece iv e t h e b en efi t of it s ba rg ai n whe n Exe cu ti ve Co ach de li ve red li m ou si ne s th at were im pr op erl y la be le d an d ov erwei gh t; su ch al le ga ti on s

su ffi ci en tl y pl ead le ga ll y co gn iz ab le da m ag es

. See Co gh l a n v

. W el lc raft Mar in e Co rp ., 24 0 F .3d 44 9, 5 42 (5t h C ir. 2 00 1) ; M o. An n. St at . § 4 00 .2-7 14 (2 ).

II I. Co ncl us io n

Fo r th e fo reg oi ng reas on s, we rev ers e t h e d i st ric t co ur t’s di sm is sa l of th e

ex pr es s warra nt y cl ai m an d rem an d fo r f u rth er pr oc eed in gs co ns is te nt wit h th is

op in io n.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-5

-