Vonder Haar v. State of Alaska, Department of Administration, Division of Motor Vehicles

349 P.3d 173 (Alaska 2015) · Supreme Court of the State of Alaska · May 1, 2015 · No. S-15385

Summary

The Alaska Supreme Court affirmed the superior court’s decision upholding the Department of Administration, Division of Motor Vehicles’ refusal to title and register a customized vehicle as a low-speed vehicle. The court held that substantial evidence supported the finding that the vehicle’s compliance with applicable federal safety standards had not been demonstrated and that the Department’s decision had a reasonable basis. The court also explained that a vehicle need not have a manufacturer’s certificate of origin or known manufacturer, but must satisfy the applicable safety standards.

Holdings

  1. Substantial evidence supported the agency's finding that the vehicle had not been shown to comply with the applicable safety standards.
  2. The DMV had a reasonable basis under AS 28.10.041 and AS 28.10.221 to refuse to title and register the vehicle as a low-speed vehicle.
  3. The reasonable-basis standard, rather than the substitution-of-judgment standard, governed review because the determination implicated agency expertise and the Department's delegated regulatory authority over vehicle titling and registration.
  4. The absence of a manufacturer's certificate of origin, a known manufacturer, or manufacture for highway use did not independently bar title and registration; actual compliance with applicable safety standards was the legal requirement. The absence of a 17-character VIN likewise was not independently dispositive because Alaska law permits replacement of missing or altered VINs.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether substantial evidence supported the agency's finding that the vehicle had not been shown to comply with applicable low-speed-vehicle safety standards.
  2. Whether the DMV had a reasonable basis under Alaska law to refuse to title and register, and to revoke the title and registration of, the vehicle as a low-speed vehicle.
  3. Whether the substitution-of-judgment standard, rather than the reasonable-basis standard, governed review of the agency's determination.
  4. Whether the absence of a manufacturer’s certificate of origin, known manufacturer, or 17-character VIN independently barred title and registration.

Disposition

affirmed

Cases Cited (15)

  • Conkey v. State, Department of Administration, Division of Motor Vehicles, 113 P.3d 1235, 1237 (Alaska 2005)(followed)
  • McKitrick v. State, Public Employees' Retirement System, 284 P.3d 832, 837 (Alaska 2012)(followed)
  • Rhines v. State, 30 P.3d 621, 624 (Alaska 2001)(followed)
  • Lindhag v. State, Department of Natural Resources, 123 P.3d 948, 952 (Alaska 2005)(followed)
  • Titus v. State, Department of Administration, Division of Motor Vehicles, 305 P.3d 1271, 1276 (Alaska 2013)(followed)
  • Davis Wright Tremaine LLP v. State, Department of Administration, 324 P.3d 293, 299 (Alaska 2014)(followed)
  • Tesoro Alaska Petroleum Co. v. Kenai Pipe Line Co., 746 P.2d 896, 903 (Alaska 1987)(followed)
  • Marathon Oil Co. v. State, Department of Natural Resources, 254 P.3d 1078, 1082 (Alaska 2011)(followed)
  • Cook Inlet Pipe Line Co. v. Alaska Public Utilities Commission, 836 P.2d 343, 348 (Alaska 1992)(followed)
  • Matanuska-Susitna Borough v. Hammond, 726 P.2d 166, 175-176 (Alaska 1986)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 15.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…