Login | January 18, 2025
Decision upheld favoring Gahanna in contract dispute with towing firm
KEITH ARNOLD
Supreme Court
Public Information Office
Published: January 17, 2025
A Franklin County appellate panel recently upheld a lower court ruling in favor of the city of Gahanna in a claim filed by a local towing company seeking a contract with the municipality.
The three-judge panel of the Tenth District Court of Appeals determined the Franklin County Common Pleas Court was not mistaken in granting the city summary judgement in the case brought by Speed Way Transportation LLC.
“From the Civ.R. 56 evidence presented, the trial court determined there was no genuine issue of material fact related to Gahanna abiding by the terms of its request for proposal or showing Gahanna abused its discretion in making its contract award determination,” Tenth District Judge Betsy Luper Schuster wrote for the 3-0 panel. “We agree. Though Speed Way disagrees with Gahanna’s decision, Speed Way does not point to any evidence demonstrating an abuse of discretion or refuting the express language in the request for proposals giving Gahanna full discretion to accept or reject any or all bids.”
The company, which operates as Speed Way Towing in Gahanna, contacted the city in response to a request in 2017 for proposal applications to provide towing services to the municipality, case background provided.
Speed Way made various improvements of its property in order to obtain conditional-use approval from the city for the company’s business operations, including installation of a wooden fence, a large water tank and trailer, and an accessibility ramp on the property, which the city approved in May 2017.
During the period while the improvements were being made, an agent of the company met with city representatives who informed him of the changing improvements necessary for approval and told him the company was likely to win a contract with the city, summary detailed.
Speed Way submitted a towing proposal application in July 2017, which the city did not accept.
In an Aug. 14, 2017, letter to Speed Way, the city stated it rejected Speed Way’s bid for the towing contract because the vehicle storage area lacked a hard surface with proper drainage, the property did not have a storage area enclosed by a chain link fence and the storage area did not comply with applicable city ordinances.
According to the summary, Speed Way filed a complaint Dec. 13, 2018, against Gahanna, asserting claims for declaratory judgment, promissory estoppel and recovery of the costs of its bid preparation. Gahanna moved for judgment on the pleadings, which the trial court granted in a March 25, 2020, decision.
Speed Way appealed, and the Tenth District reversed the trial court’s decision with respect to the claims for promissory estoppel and declaratory judgment, having determined the trial court erred in granting judgment on the pleadings as to the promissory estoppel claim because Gahanna failed to show that no factual issues exist on the question of whether it was engaged in a governmental function.
The appellate panel also determined the trial court erred in granting judgment because Gahanna failed to show that no factual question remained as to whether it abused its discretion in its public contract decision-making, summary provided.
On remand, the parties engaged in additional discovery and Gahanna moved for summary judgment June 2, 2022, prompting the company to file opposing memoranda.
The trial court granted the city’s motion for summary judgment Feb. 2, 2024, on the basis that the city was engaged in a governmental function and that Speed Way could not show the city abused its discretion in rejecting its towing contract bid.
Speed Way appealed a second time, summary provided.
“Because Speed Way did not demonstrate that a question of fact remains as to whether Gahanna acted unreasonably, arbitrarily or unconscionably when it did not accept Speed Way’s bid or that Gahanna otherwise did not abide by the terms of its request for proposal, the trial court did not err in granting Gahanna’s motion for summary judgment on the declaratory judgment claim,” Luper Schuster continued.
Copyright © 2024 The Daily Reporter - All Rights Reserved