A Budget franchisee rented a Budget truck to JBG Trucking. The rental agreement provided that any au

For all actions commenced on or after August hotels on the riverwalk san antonio 10, 2005 , the " Graves Amendment " provides vehicle renters and lessors with a statutory basis for dismissing vicarious liability claims in motor vehicle accident lawsuits. This amendment to the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act of 2005: A Legacy for Users ("SAFETEA") provides in relevant part that:
[a]n owner of a motor vehicle that rents or leases the vehicle to a person (or an affiliate of the owner) shall not be liable under the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, by reason hotels on the riverwalk san antonio of being the owner of the vehicle (or an affiliate of the owner), for harm to persons hotels on the riverwalk san antonio or property that results or arises out of the use, operation, or possession of the vehicle during the period of the rental or lease, if-
(2) there is no negligence or criminal wrongdoing hotels on the riverwalk san antonio on the part of the owner (or an affiliate of the owner). 49 U.S.C. 30106(a) . For purposes of the Graves Amendment, section hotels on the riverwalk san antonio 30102(a)(6) of Chapter 301 of Title 49 of the United States Code , entitled hotels on the riverwalk san antonio Motor Vehicle Safety, defines "motor vehicle" as "a vehicle driven or drawn by mechanical power and manufactured primarily for use on public streets, roads, and highways, but does not include a vehicle operated only on a rail line."
Motor vehicle rental and leasing defendants use the Graves Amendment as a tort defense to indirect or vicarious liability under state laws such as New York's Vehicle Traffic Law 388 . In pertinent part, that statute provides:
1. Every owner of a vehicle used or operated in this state shall be liable and responsible for death or injuries to person or property resulting from negligence in the use or operation of such vehicle, in the business of such owner or otherwise, by any person using or operating the same with the permission, express or implied, of such owner. Whenever any vehicles as hereinafter defined shall be used in combination with one another, by attachment or tow, the person using or operating any one vehicle shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to be using or operating each vehicle in the combination, and the owners thereof shall be jointly and severally liable hotels on the riverwalk san antonio hereunder.
2. As used in this section, "vehicle" means a "motor vehicle", as defined in section one hundred twenty-five of this chapter, except fire and police vehicles, self-propelled combines, self-propelled corn and hay harvesting machines and tractors used exclusively for agricultural purposes, and shall also include "semitrailer" and trailer" as defined in article one of this chapter, whether or not such vehicles are used or operated upon a public highway. For the purpose of this section, self-propelled caterpillar or crawler-type equipment while being operated on the contract site, shall not be defined as motor vehicles.
A Budget franchisee rented a Budget truck to JBG Trucking. The rental agreement provided that any authorized employee of JBG with a valid driver's license was permitted to operate the vehicle upon presentation of a valid driver's license by the company employee who picks up the vehicle. Jamie Collins presented a restricted driver's license to the Budget location and, while driving the rented truck, struck and killed the plaintiff's decedent, who was riding a bicycle. Plaintiff alleged that the Graves Amendment did not apply because the Budget defendants knew or should have known from Collins' presentation of a restricted driver's license that he had a history of drug and/or alcohol related offenses. In opposition to the Budget defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's complaint and for summary judgment, plaintiff argued that the Budget defendants negligently entrusted the rented truck to Collins, and that their negligence precluded application of the Graves Amendment's vicarious liability exemption.
While agreeing that the presentation of a restricted license "does not, in and of itself, compel hotels on the riverwalk san antonio a motor vehicle rental agent of average ken to scrutinize the renter", Kings County Supreme Court Justice Francois Rivera ruled that the Budget defendants had not carried their burden of establishing their entitlement to summary judgment because they had not submitted their written rental policies and procedures and established that the Budget franchisee followed hotels on the riverwalk san antonio those policies and procedures in renting the truck to JBG:
However, at this juncture we cannot find that the moving defendants are entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law. Upon searching the record, the Court finds that triable hotels on the riverwalk san antonio issues of material fact remain regarding whether Perfect possessed special knowledge of any propensity by Collins to operate the subject truck in an unreasonably dangerous way. Specifically, the moving defendants have not tendered any evidence establishing that Perfect followed the proper policies and procedures required of Budget rental locations before renting vehicles to drivers. [FN9] Nor does the moving defendants' reply address their failure to produce such documents. hotels on the riverwalk san antonio Although we decline hotels on the riverwalk san antonio to impose upon motor vehicle rental agents any obligation to check a renter's driving hotels on the riverwalk san antonio record beyond verifying that he or she has a valid driver's license, absent further evidence of the unsuitability of the renter and the agent's knowledge thereof, we need also conclude that such precautions are not part of Budget's hotels on the riverwalk san antonio internal policies and procedures hotels on the riverwalk san antonio before granting summary judgment to the moving defendants. The moving defendants have not persuaded us of that fact with their showing. Having failed to eliminate all material issues of fact from the case, they do not meet their prima facie burden hotels on the riverwalk san antonio of establishing that they had no reason to doubt Collins' hotels on the riverwalk san antonio ability to operate a motor vehicle properly and safely. The Court need not examine the sufficiency of the supporting evidence in plaintiff's opposition papers. Editor's hotels on the riverwalk san antonio Note (December 15, 2010) ~~ The Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed this decision on October 19, 2010 and granted the Budget defendants' motion for summary hotels on the riverwalk san antonio judgment, holding that "[c]ontrary to the plaintiff's contention, the appellants' failure to provide copies of any internal policies as to investigation of potential renters with restricted licenses constitutes an insufficient basis upon which to deny their motion for summary hotels on the riverwalk san antonio judgment. Even if such a policy had been violated, under the circumstances of this case, such violation would not constitute actionable negligence ( see Lambert v Bracco, 18 AD3d 619 , 620; Newsome v Cservak, 130 AD2d 637, 638)."
Elrac, Inc. (Enterprise Rent-A-Car) rented a car to Jennifer Warner on March 10,2006. Warner presented her driver's hotels on the riverwalk san antonio license and information regarding her automobile insurance coverage. The car rental agreement that Warner signed included hotels on the riverwalk san antonio a provision requiring the driver to certify that her driver s license was valid. Erlac's regional loss manager testified that although Elrac employees input information appearing on the face of a customer s driver's license into its computer system, Elrac had no computer system which would have enabled an Elrac employee at a rental location to determine whether a customer's driver s license was suspended. Elrac argued that its business practice of requiring customers to both present facially valid drivers hotels on the riverwalk san antonio licenses and to confirm that the licenses were valid by having the customer sign the acknowledgment section of the rental agreement satisfied its obligation under Vehicle Traffic Law 509(4) ("No person shall knowingly authorize or permit hotels on the riverwalk san antonio a motor vehicle owned by him or in his charge to be operated [by an unlicensed driver].") to ensure that it rented only to competent drivers.
Plaintiff's sole cause of action against Elrac is for negligence premised upon its alleged duty to investigate the status hotels on the riverwalk san antonio of Warner s driver s license. The so-called Graves Amendment (USC 30106[a][1] and [a][2]) provides that an owner of a rental vehicle shall not be liable under state law for harm to persons or property resulting from the use, operation or possession of the vehicle during the rental period. Plaintiff, by her cause action, seeks to impose a duty upon Elrac to research its customers driving histories beyond verifying the existence of a valid driver s license. Inasmuch as no such obligation exists, plaintiff's complaint, as to Elrac, must be dismissed.
Defendant Hub Truck Rental Corp. rented a commercial truck that was involved in a motor vehicle accident. The Graves Amendment's vicarious liability exemption does not apply if there is negligence or criminal wrongdoing on the part of the rented or leased vehicle's owner or an affiliate of the owner. hotels on the riverwalk san antonio In denying defendant's motion for summary judgment pursuant to the Graves hotels on the riverwalk san antonio Amendment, Suffolk County Supreme Court Justice Peter Fox Cohalan ruled that Hub had failed to carry its initial motion burden hotels on the riverwalk san antonio of establishing that it was not negligent:
Vicarious liability is not abrogated where the injury or damages results from the negligence of the owner s employee in the operation or maintenance of the vehicle, nor where it seems the owner was negligent in entrusting the vehicle to the operator ( see , Byrne v Collins , 25 Misc 3d 1232 [A] ; 2009 NY Slip Op 52395U [2009]; Luma v Elrac, lnc. , 19 Misc 3d 1138 [A] , 862 NYS2d 81 5 [2008]).
Here, Hub has failed to establish its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. In his October 26, 2007 EBT testimony, Hayes Conn, Ill., Hub s vice president of maintenance, stated that, prior to renting the subject truck to Nuzzolese on August 3, 2005, a pre-trip inspection including brakes was conducted on the truck and that one of Hub s employees would check air pressure leaks in the brake system and would walk around the truck to make sure that all requirements of the inspection were properly performed. hotels on the riverwalk san antonio In his May 7, 2008 EBT Butler testified that, prior to the impact with the plaintiffs vehicle, he put [his] foot onto the brake and knew that he wasn t going to stop because the truck he was operating had no