Clyde & Co's Phoenix team obtains dismissal with prejudice in wrongful death action

Associate William VanDehei and Clyde & Co's Phoenix team obtained dismissal with prejudice of all claims against national car-rental agency in a wrongful death action.

In late October 2022, an individual rented a vehicle from the Scottsdale location of a national car-rental agency. Several days later, in the early hours of November 5, he was driving the vehicle in Mesa, Arizona, at a high rate of speed and failed to stop for a red light, striking another vehicle. As a result of the impact, the driver of the second vehicle was ejected from her vehicle and died on scene. A toxicology report indicated the at-fault driver had a blood-alcohol content of 0.185, along with other substances in his system, when the accident occurred. The at-fault driver later pled guilty to manslaughter charges and was sentenced to a 19-year term of incarceration.

In April 2023, the decedent’s widower filed a wrongful death suit against the at-fault driver, the car rental company, and various other entities. Specifically, the Plaintiff claimed that the corporate defendants failed to conduct a criminal background check on the the at-fault driver, which would have identified previous DUI convictions and a requirement that he only operated vehicles equipped with an ignition interlock device. The Plaintiff later amended his complaint to add a claim under Arizona’s Consumer Fraud Act based on statements in the FAQ section of the rental agency’s website.

On behalf of the rental agency and other corporate defendants, Partner Dan Worker, Senior Counsel Melissa Gardner, and VanDehei moved to dismiss, arguing that Arizona did not require criminal background checks on prospective rental customers. More importantly, the motion further argued the the at-fault driver’s certified DMV records established that his driver’s license had no indication that he was required to drive only vehicles equipped with interlock devices. The motion further argued that the Plaintiff’s fraud claim was not only barred by the statute of limitations, but also that he failed to identify any false or misleading statements on the company website.

Following oral arguments, the Court agreed with VanDehei that the Plaintiff failed to establish any duty to conduct a background check on prospective renters. The Court also found that the Plaintiff could not establish the necessary causation because the the at-fault driver’s license only “revealed an individual that was legally qualified to drive a rental vehicle.” Regarding the consumer fraud claim, the Plaintiff had not identified, nor could the Court locate, any misrepresentations within the FAQ section of the rental agency’s website. As a result, the Court granted the corporate entities’ motion and dismissed both claims with prejudice.

This win highlights Clyde & Co's aggressive litigation strategy to get clients dismissed from cases in early litigation.