Delaware Court Allows Negligent Maintenance Claims Against Vehicle Lessor Despite Graves Amendment

The Delaware Superior Court denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss all claims against it, applying Delaware law to determine that wholesale dismissal of all claims was not warranted under the Graves Amendment because it does not absolve leasing companies of their own negligence.

This suit was brought by the driver of a motor vehicle who was hit by a tractor trailer owned by New Horizons, leased by Western Express, Inc. and driven by a Western Express employee acting as its agent. The complaint alleged the tractor trailer driver’s negligence and the owner of the tractor trailer’s conduct are implicated both through agency and direct negligence theories, including negligent entrustment and provision of a defective vehicle.

The lease between the defendant-owner and the plaintiff included language assigning maintenance duties to the defendant-owner. The court reasoned that, whether the defendant-owner in fact had performed maintenance to the tractor trailer, whether any breach occurred and whether such breach caused the plaintiff’s injuries were factual issues inappropriate for resolution on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.

While the Graves Amendment preempts state-law vicarious liability claims against vehicle lessors where the lessor is engaged in the business of leasing and there is no negligence or criminal wrongdoing by the lessor, when a lessor undertakes the responsibility of vehicle maintenance via the lease contract, claims for negligent maintenance present potential direct negligence claims outside Graves’ vicarious liability shield. Because the complaint pled direct negligence in addition to imputed liability and because the contours of the defendant-owner’s role and duties under the lease require factual development, dismissal of all claims against the defendant-owner is not warranted.

The court allowed the theories of direct negligence to proceed and stated that the viability and scope of any vicarious liability would be addressed further as the litigation proceeded and the record is developed.