Government
Jun. 22, 2002
U.S. High Court Gives S.F. Tow-Truck Driver the Hook
SAN FRANCISCO - Patrick Servantes, the city's tow truck driver from hell, has two wheels in the ditch thanks to a U.S. Supreme Court decision Thursday in an analogous Ohio case.
In a 7-2 decision, the justices upheld the authority of local governments to make public safety rules for truckers, including towing companies.
That ruling deflates a major part of Servantes' appeal, which the Supreme Court has kept in its pending file while it decided the Ohio case. City of Columbus v. Ours Garage and Wrecker Service, Inc., 2002 DJDAR 6867.
Servantes incurred the wrath of city officials after he illegally towed away 747 cars and held them for cash ransom at a Bayview lot under Interstate 280 during a five-year reign of roadway terror in the 1990s, according to a 1999 ruling by San Francisco Superior Court Judge Paul H. Alvarado.
The judge's $214,000 fine and order that Servantes never again tow cars from private property in California were upheld in 2001 by the 1st District Court of Appeal. People ex rel. Renne v. Servantes, 86 Cal.App.4th 1081. The unanimous appellate panel said Presiding Justice Harold G. Clarke of the Georgia Supreme Court could have been describing Servantes when he wrote in 1989:
"The law gives the towing company a great advantage over the owner of the towed car, and creates a great potential for unfair business practices and abuse of the public."
The California Supreme Court denied Servantes' petition for review.
Those decisions have put Servantes' hauling racket on the hook.
"He's virtually out of business," said Servantes' local counsel, David W. Washington of Oakland. "He does some consensual towing, but he primarily works in construction now."
After losing in the state courts, Servantes took his case to the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing the Interstate Commerce Act preempts San Francisco from regulating tow truck operations. Servantes v. Renne, 01-336.
But the high court said Thursday that an exception to the ICA lets state and local governments adopt safety regulations for truckers, including tow trucks.
"Ordinarily, a political subdivision may exercise whatever portion of state power the State, under its own constitution and laws, chooses to delegate to the subdivision," wrote Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg for the majority.
"Absent a clear statement to the contrary, Congress' reference to the 'regulatory authority of a State' should be read to preserve, not preempt, the traditional prerogative of the States to delegate their authority to their constituent parts."
Justices Sandra Day O'Connor and Antonin Scalia dissented.
Still in play is Servantes' claim that the basis for his state appellate court defeat - his refusal to accept credit cards - is bogus because it's unrelated to a public safety issue, according to his high court lawyer, Erik S. Jaffe, of Washington, D.C.
"So now we know states and cities can regulate safety [of public carriers]," Jaffe said Thursday. "Now the question becomes what constitutes motor vehicle safety. We argue that everything Mr. Servantes was charged with has nothing to do with motor vehicle safety."
Whether the Supreme Court will decide that question is unclear. The justices could remand Servantes' case to the California courts, decide the remaining issue on its own or simply dismiss the appeal. A order on how the court will dispose of Servantes' petition could come within a week or so, Jaffe said.
Deputy City Attorney Rose-Ellen Heinz said there is a clear connection between citizen safety and tow truck operators' acceptance of credit cards.
"You're stuck out at the tow yard without any cash, and you're in a vulnerable position," said Heinz, who successfully argued San Francisco's position before the state Court of Appeal.
The credit card issue has not been decided at the U.S. Supreme Court level. But state courts around the county have ruled that credit card acceptance by tow operators is indeed a safety issue, Heinz said.
The leading California case is Berry v. Hannigan, 7 Cal.App.4th 587 (1992), which upholds a state vehicle code requirement that tow operators take plastic because it "directly affects the safety and welfare of vehicle operators and owners."
Heinz, who wrote an amicus brief in the Ours Garage case, said Thursday's decision is a big win for cities.
"That's so great," she rejoiced. "It helps cities protect their citizens by allowing them to issue permits to tow operators to keep criminals and bad actors off the road."
An opposite decision in Ours Garage would have forced the state to assume that duty, Heinz said. She serves on a Sacramento task force assigned to devise a statewide plan in case the Ohio case went the other way.
"For California as a state to do it would be an enormous job," she said.
John Roemer
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424
Send a letter to the editor:
Email: letters@dailyjournal.com