APPEAL
FROM THE BENTON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. 04CV-17-78]
HONORABLE JOHN R. SCOTT, JUDGE
Caddell Reynolds, P.A., by: Bill G. Horton, for appellants.
Baker
Hostetler LLP, by: Rodger L. Eckelberry, pro hac vice; and
Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates & Woodyard, P.L.L.C.,
by: Lyn P. Pruitt and Megan D. Hargraves, for appellee.
BRANDON J. HARRISON, JUDGE
In May
2016, Earl Betts and Amy Betts bought a new 2016 Jeep
Wrangler from a dealership in Springdale, Arkansas. When they
did so they signed a retail-installment sales contract that
gave Ally Financial a secured interest in the jeep in
exchange for lending them $39, 137.26. The Bettses insured
the jeep through a policy with USAA General Indemnity Company
(USAA). They also bought additional coverage for it through a
guaranteed asset-protection (GAP) contract with the
dealership.
Not
long after they had bought the jeep, the Bettses were
involved in a collision that totaled the jeep. USAA paid Ally
Financial $32, 273.19, and the breakdown of that sum was as
follows: $30, 243 for the jeep's actual cash value; $2,
015.80 for sales tax; $10 for a title fee; $2.89 for the
validation decal fee; $0.50 for the lien filing fee; and $1
for the registration fee. The GAP provider paid Ally $3,
764.26. After these payments, the Bettses still owed Ally $2,
003.65. Ally has sued the Bettses for the remaining amount,
plus interest.
After
filing the insurance claim, the Bettses demanded that USAA
pay the sales-tax amount, the transfer fee, the validation
decal fee, and the registration fee directly to them, not to
their creditor Ally. When USAA refused to do so, the Bettses
sued the company in January 2017 in the Benton County Circuit
Court. USAA answered the complaint. Four months later, the
Bettses amended their complaint to allege that they were
members of a similarly situated class of insured USAA
customers or former customers. They alleged that USAA's
failure to issue direct payment to the plaintiffs for the
sales tax and fees violated Arkansas law.
USAA
filed a notice of removal, but the United States District
Court for the Western District of Arkansas remanded the case
in late June 2017. A certified copy of the federal order and
docket was filed in the Benton County Circuit Court the same
day.
In
October 2017, USAA filed a counterclaim against the Bettses
for a declaratory judgment. USAA also filed a third-party
complaint against the lienholder Ally Financial, Inc. and
against the dealership that had sold the jeep to the Bettses
(Everett CDJR, LLC). In addition to its declaratory-judgment
request against the two third-party defendants, USAA claimed
unjust enrichment. It requested that if the circuit court
determined that USAA must pay the $2, 030.19 in taxes and
fees directly to the plaintiffs, then the defendants should
return that money to USAA. In November 2017, Ally answered
the third-party complaint and filed a cross-claim against the
Bettses for the deficiency balance on the installment
contract. Everett also answered USAA's third-party
complaint.
In
February 2018, USAA moved for summary judgment against the
plaintiffs. It argued, among other things, that it had
properly paid the vehicle sales tax and fees to Ally under
the terms of the USAA automobile-insurance contract and
Arkansas law. A flurry of responses and motions ensued.
Everett said that it had assigned its contractual rights
under the GAP policy to Ally, so it was not a necessary party
to the litigation.
In June
2018, the circuit court granted summary judgment to USAA. The
summary-judgment order states, "USAA GIC is entitled to
judgment as a matter of law on Plaintiffs' claims and on
the claim for declaratory judgment set out in its [c]ounter
claim against Plaintiffs; and Plaintiff's Amended
Complaint against USAA GIC is dismissed, with
prejudice." Incorporated in the appealed
summary-judgment order is a Rule 54(b) certificate. The
certificate is replicated here:
Rule
54(b) Certificate
With
respect to the issues determined by the above judgment, the
Court finds:
1. With the exception of Ally Bank's cross claim against
Plaintiffs for the unpaid balance of the loan on the 2016
Jeep Wrangler, the remaining claims in this case cannot be
accurately or efficiently adjudicated until USAA ...