Buddy Gregg Motor Homes, Inc. v. Marathon Coach, Inc.

This appeal presents substantive and procedural issues concerning the "hybrid claims resolution process" for certain civil damages claims relating to the sale of motor vehicles in Texas. In three issues, appellant argued that the Motor Vehicle Division's order must be reversed because it is based on legal error, is the product of improper procedure and is not supported by substantial evidence. The Austin Court of Appeals overruled these contentions and affirmed the division's order. Austin Court of Appeals, No. 03-08-00471-CV, 09-13-2010

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

OPINION

This appeal presents substantive and procedural issues concerning the “hybrid claims resolution process” for certain civil damages claims relating to the sale of motor vehicles in Texas. See Subaru of Am., Inc. v. David McDavid Nissan, Inc., 84 S.W.3d 212, 222-26 (Tex. 2002). It arises from proceedings following our decision in Buddy Gregg Motor Homes, Inc. v. Motor Vehicle Board of the Texas Department of Transportation, 156 S.W.3d 91 (Tex. App.–Austin 2004, pet. denied) (Buddy Gregg I). To summarize the proceedings that followed Buddy Gregg I, the private parties involved in that appeal–appellant Buddy Gregg Motor Homes, Inc. (Buddy Gregg) and appellee Marathon Coach, Inc. (Marathon)–litigated before appellee the Motor Vehicle Division (“Division”) of the Texas Department of Transportation whether the Division*fn1 order that we had addressed in Buddy Gregg I conclusively established (as Buddy Gregg contended) or negated (as Marathon suggested) a violation by Marathon of Texas’s prohibition against vertical integration of motor vehicle dealers and manufacturers. The Division issued an order finding and declaring that its earlier order did not have the effect of establishing a violation and that no violation had occurred. Buddy Gregg then sought judicial review of the Division’s order in the district court,*fn2 and Marathon removed the cause to this Court. In three issues, Buddy Gregg argues that the Division’s order must be reversed because it is based on legal error, is the product of improper procedure, and is not supported by substantial evidence. We will overrule these contentions and affirm the Division’s order.

BACKGROUND

Buddy Gregg Motor Homes, Inc. v. Marathon Coach, Inc.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal