Warning

Info

Table of Contents
Chris22, HLS '22 |

0 0

Back to briefs

Allen v. Hyatt Regency–Nashville Hotel

(1984)

Tennessee Supreme Court - 668 S.W.2d 286

tl;dr:

When a person parks his car in a parking garage and receives a ticket for parking there, he enters into a bailment relationship with the owne

Video Summary

ICRAIssue, Conclusion, Rule, Analysis for Allen v. Hyatt Regency–Nashville Hotel

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Allen v. Hyatt Regency–Nashville Hotel case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

Facts & HoldingAllen v. Hyatt Regency–Nashville Hotel case brief facts & holding

Facts:The plaintiff parked his car in the defendant's parking garage....

Holding:The court held that when plaintiff parked his car, a...

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Allen v. Hyatt Regency–Nashville Hotel case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

DeepDiveHighlight a legal term to see the definition

Font size -+
Allen v. Hyatt Regency–Nashville Hotel | Case Brief DeepDive
Majority opinion, author: HARBISON, Justice.
Level 1
Click below 👇 to DeepDive

The case involves the liability of a commercial parking garage operator for the theft of a vehicle parked by the owner. The Supreme Court of New Jersey held that a garage owner has a duty of reasonable care to protect parked cars and their contents, and authorized a presumption of negligence from proof of damage to a car parked in an enclosed garage. The Tennessee courts follow a traditional bailment analysis in park-and-lock cases, and in this case, a bailment for hire had been created between the appellee and the garage operator. The appellee was entitled to the statutory presumption of negligence provided in T.C.A. § 24-5-111 upon proof of nondelivery. The lower courts' decision was affirmed.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Allen v. Hyatt Regency–Nashville Hotel case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

Dissenting opinion, author: DROWOTA, Justice
Level 1
Click below 👇 to DeepDive

This case involves the liability of a commercial parking garage operator. The majority opinion holds that a bailment contract exists, entitling the plaintiff to the presumption of negligence if non-delivery is proven. The dissenting opinion disagrees, stating that no bailment existed, and the plaintiff must prove the negligence of the parking facility operator. The traditional bailment criteria are not suitable for analyzing park and lock cases. The proper standard to be followed is "reasonable care under the circumstances whereby foreseeability shall be a measure of liability." The language on the ticket dispensed by the parking garage is not necessarily sufficient to exonerate the garage. The case involves a parked car, locked, and with the ignition key retained. The majority opinion finds that these facts do not violate the legal requirements of a bailment for hire, but the dissenting opinion disagrees. A bailment is created when the operator knowingly and voluntarily assumes control, possession, or custody of the vehicle. Delivery and acceptance are necessary factors. The test to determine if a bailment has been created in a parking facility is whether the vehicle operator has made a delivery to the parking facility operator that amounts to a relinquishment of exclusive possession, control, and dominion over the vehicle, allowing the parking facility operator to exclude others from possessing it.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Allen v. Hyatt Regency–Nashville Hotel case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

🤯 High points 🤯Key points contributed by students on LSD

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Allen v. Hyatt Regency–Nashville Hotel case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

LSD+ Case Briefs

Features

  • DeepDive for detailed case analysis
  • Over 50,000 existing case briefs
  • Instant briefs for another 6,000,000 cases
  • Highlight dictionary for legal term definitions
  • Social learning with chat and high points

Over 50,000 Cases Briefed

LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.

14-Day Free Trial

Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.

Integrated Legal Dictionary

Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.

Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.

DeepDive

DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.

Brief anything. Instantly.

Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.

Social Learning with Chat and High Points

Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.

Real-Time Brief Feedback

Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.

Allen v. Hyatt Regency–Nashville Hotel

Chat for Allen v. Hyatt Regency–Nashville Hotel
brief-577
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.