Lauvetz v. Alaska Sales And Service D/B/A National Car Renta
828 P.2d 162 (Alaska 1991)
Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Osborne rented a van from P. He listed D as an authorized driver. Osborne was offered an optional collision damage waiver (CDW), which he accepted, and optional personal accident insurance, which he declined. The CDW added $8.95 per day to the basic daily rate of $70.00. On the face of the Rental Agreement, there is no indication of the scope of the CDW. Directly above the CDW box, in boldface and the same size type as 'Collision Damage Waiver Option,' are the words 'See Terms and Conditions.' P's agent did not inform Osborne and D where the terms and conditions could be found. The agent apparently made no representations about the scope of the CDW, nor did the agent indicate that the terms and conditions contained specific exclusions to the CDW. The right flap of a travel folder opened into three panels containing the terms and conditions. The terms and conditions were printed in black on a white background and were legible. D and Osborne did not read the terms and conditions. Those conditions prohibited use by any driver under the influence of intoxicants, drugs, or any other substance known to impair driving ability. In capital letters it also proclaimed prohibited use voided the CDW. The van was damaged while D was driving. D was charged with and pled no contest to reckless driving. AS 28.35.040. P filed suit against D and Osborne, seeking compensatory and punitive damages for the wreck of the van. The complaint claimed that the CDW did not apply, because Osborne and D remained liable for any damage resulting from a prohibited use of the vehicle, specifically, use by an intoxicated driver or use in a reckless manner. P got a grant of partial summary judgment and D appealed. D argues that the exclusions were beyond the reasonable expectations of lessees accepting P's standardized contract.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co