Allen v. Hyatt Regency-Nashville Hotel

Supreme Court of Tennessee · 1984 · Property

PropertyBailmentParking garage liabilitybailmentparking garagepark-and-lockcommercial garagetheft

Facts

The defendant operated a modern indoor multi-story parking garage connected with its downtown Nashville hotel, open to the public, with a single entrance controlled by a ticket machine and a single exit controlled by an attendant. The plaintiff's husband drove the plaintiff's car into the garage, took an automatically dispensed ticket, parked on the fourth floor, locked the car, kept the ignition key, and left for several hours. When he returned, the car was gone and was never recovered; the exit attendant said the car had not come out through the exit, and the garage also employed security guards who patrolled the premises. The parking ticket stated that charges were for use of parking space only and disclaimed responsibility for theft, but the record showed the ticket was used only to measure parking time, not to identify vehicles.

Issue

Whether an implied bailment for hire arises when a customer parks and locks a car in an enclosed, attended commercial parking garage, retains the keys, and the vehicle is later stolen. If so, whether proof of nondelivery entitles the customer to the statutory presumption of negligence.

Rule

In Tennessee, unless the parties clearly create some other relationship by their conduct or express contract, a customer who parks for custody and safekeeping in an enclosed, attended commercial garage with limited access and an attendant-controlled exit may create an implied bailment for hire even though the customer parks and locks the vehicle and retains the keys. Upon proof of nondelivery in such a bailment, the customer is entitled to the statutory presumption of negligence under T.C.A. § 24-5-111.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Memphis, Lila Moreno drove into Riverfront Center Garage, a multi-level indoor garage open to the public. She took a machine-issued time ticket at the only entrance, parked and locked her car on the third level, kept her keys, and left; the only exit was staffed by an attendant who required a ticket before any car could leave. When Lila returned that evening, the car was gone.

Under the majority rule, which is the strongest conclusion?

Explanation. The majority held that an implied bailment for hire may arise when a customer parks for custody and safekeeping in an enclosed, attended commercial garage with limited access and an attendant-controlled exit, even if the customer parks, locks, and retains the keys. The practical realities of operator control and expected protection matter more than formal possession of the ignition key.