Tesla can challenge Louisiana direct sales ban, US appeals court rules
Recasts, adds details from decision and dissent, efforts to obtain comment, case citation
By Jonathan Stempel
Aug 26 (Reuters) -A divided federal appeals court on Monday revived a lawsuit in which Tesla TSLA.O, the electric car company run by billionaire Elon Musk, challenged Louisiana's ban on direct vehicle sales to consumers.
In a 2-1 decision, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans reversed a lower court judge's dismissal of Tesla's constitutional due process claim, and vacated her dismissal of its antitrust claim. It upheld her dismissal of Tesla's equal protection claim.
Tesla had sued members of the Louisiana Motor Vehicle Commission, dealerships owned by individual commissioners, and the Louisiana Automobile Dealers Association in August 2022.
It accused various defendants of exploiting their control of the motor vehicle commission to drive Tesla from the market by targeting its sales model, which does not use a network of franchised dealers.
Tesla accused Louisiana officials of illegally banning direct sales since 2017 and restricting the leasing and servicing of its vehicles in the state.
Circuit Judge Jerry Smith wrote that Tesla sufficiently alleged that the defendants had "plausible actual bias," citing emails from the commission's executive director assuring Tesla rivals that their complaints would be addressed.
The dissenting judge, Dana Douglas, would have upheld the dismissal of Tesla's case.
"The issue is whether a company can change the composition of a state's regulatory commission because it merely disagrees with state law which the commission is required to enforce," she wrote. "But Tesla cannot use this court as an end-run around the legislative process."
Lawyers for Tesla did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The defendants' lawyers did not immediately respond to similar requests.
Smith was appointed to the bench by Republican President Ronald Reagan. Circuit Judge Catharina Haynes, an appointee of Republican President George W. Bush, concurred in much of the result. Douglas was appointed by Democratic President Joe Biden.
The appeals court returned the case to U.S. District Judge Sarah Vance in New Orleans, who had dismissed it in June 2023.
The case is Tesla Inc et al v. Louisiana Automobile Dealers Association et al, 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 23-30480.
Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Stephen Coates
Related Assets
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.
