Baron 4th v. Division of Motor Vehicles
Date Filed2023-12-18
DocketN23A-05-001
JudgeWharton J.
Cited0 times
StatusPublished
Full Opinion (html_with_citations)
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
WILLIAM BARON 4th, )
)
Appellant, )
)
v. ) C.A. No. N23A-05-001 FWW
)
DIVISION OF MOTOR VEHICLES, )
)
Appellee. )
Submitted: September 11, 2023
Decided: December 18, 2023
ORDER
On Appeal from the Division of Motor Vehicles
AFFIRMED
William Baron 4th, 1170 Bayview Road, Middletown, Delaware 19709, pro se,
Appellant.
George T. Lees III, Esquire, Deputy Attorney General, DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE, 800 South Bay Road, Dover, Delaware 19901, Attorney for Appellee
Delaware Department of Transportation, Division of Motor Vehicles.
WHARTON, J.
This 18th day of December 2023, upon consideration of Appellant William
Baron 4thâs (âBaronâ) Opening Brief,1 Appellee Division of Motor Vehiclesâ
(âDMVâ) Answering Brief,2 Baronâs Reply Brief,3 and DMVâs letter and affidavit,4
it appears to the Court that:
1. On April 7, 2023, Baron imported a 1997 Mitsubishi Minicab
(âMinicabâ) to the United States through the Port of Baltimore.5 The Minicab is
equipped with working rear and front lights, rear and front turn signals, brake lights,
a working brake pedal, a rear-view mirror, a horn, reflectors and flares.6 Baron states
that he had purchased the Minicab to navigate through rows of timber on his 148-
acre farm in Felton, Kent County, Delaware.7 On April 21, 2023, Baron applied to
DMV to title and register his Minicab.8 He sought to do so under a âspecial farm
vehicle registrationâ with a farm vehicle (âFVâ) tag.9
2. When importing the Minicab, Baron completed at least two federal
government declaration forms.10 DMV requires Certificate(s) of Compliance so that
1
D.I. 11.
2
D.I. 14.
3
D.I. 15.
4
D.I. 18.
5
Ans. Br. at 1, D.I. 14.
6
Opening Br. at 2, D.I. 11.
7
Id. at 2. Baron sought to register the Minicab at a DMV location in the county
where he resides, New Castle County. Id.
8
Id.
9
Id.
10
See Reply Br. at Ex., B, D.I. 15.
2
certain imported vehicles comply with U.S. DOT Safety Standards and U.S. EPA
Regulations for emissions.11 Baron completed a United States Department of
Transportation (âU.S. DOTâ) Declaration Form on Federal Motor Vehicle Safety,
Bumper and Theft Prevention Standards.12 An imported vehicle is exempted from
these federal standards when it is over 25 years old.13 Baron indicated on the form
that the vehicle was compliant with this exemption requirement. Baron also
completed a United States Environmental Protection Agency (âEPAâ) Declaration
Form for the Importation of Motor Vehicles and Motor Vehicle Engines Subject to
Federal Air Pollution Regulations.14 An imported vehicle is exempted from these
federal regulations when it is imported in an original unmodified configuration, and
is at least 21 years old.15 Baron indicated on the form that the vehicle was compliant
with these exemption requirements.
3. Baron previously has registered four vehicles under a âspecial farm
vehicle registrationâ - a 1966 Kaiser Jeep, a 1999 Ford F250 pickup truck, a 2021
Pequea trailer and a 2022 PJ TM trailer.16 Baron also previously has registered one
âoff-highway vehicleâ (âOHVâ) - a 1998 Honda 450 All-Terrain Vehicle.17 On
11
See 2 Del. Admin. C. § 2278.
12
See Reply Br. at Ex., B, D.I. 15.
13
49 CFR 591.5(i)(1).
14
See id.
15
See Reply Br. at Ex., B, D.I. 15; See 19 CFR 12.73(e)(6).
16
Ans. Br. at 5, D.I. 14.
17
Id.
3
numerous occasions, DMV has suggested Baron register the Minicab as an OHV.
Baron has declined to do so.
4. DMV classifies the Minicab as a âmini truck.â18 DMV states that they
have not and do not title or register mini trucks for use on the roads of this State
because mini trucks were not manufactured to be operated on the roadways of the
United States.19 Mini trucks are not manufactured to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards and do not contain equipment mandated for vehicles imported into and
proposed for use on the roads in the United States.20 The National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (âNHTSAâ) has issued guidance that mini trucks should not
be licensed for operation on public highways.21 The Insurance Institute for Highway
Safety (âIIHSâ) does not ââendorse the use of minitrucks on public roads.ââ22 The
American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (âAAMVAâ) classifies mini
trucks as off-road vehicles, not suited or safe to be operated on public roads.23
5. Through email communication and phone discussion, Baron sought a
review of the initial DMV decision.24 DMV Chief of Vehicle Services Valerie Carey
18
âMini Truckâ is Delaware Statutory Code or Delaware Administrative Code
definition.
19
Ans. Br. at 1, D.I. 14.
20
Id.
21
Id.
22
Id.
23
Id.
24
Baron also sought various legislative interventions as part of his appeal.
4
confirmed the initial decision and conveyed to Baron that there was no ââdata
showing [DMV] titled [mini trucks] in the past.ââ25 Then DMV Deputy Director
Amy Anthony also confirmed the decision and conveyed to Baron that the Minicab
was not âmanufactured to be on the roadways nor does it meet any EPA standards.â26
6. At some point, DMV advised Baron that based upon the guidance from
NHTSA, IIHS and AAMVA, in addition to DMVâs interpretation of the statutes it is
tasked with overseeing, namely the provisions of Title 21 and the provisions of 2
Del. Admin. C. § 2278 and 7 Del. Admin. C. § 1131, the Minicab was and is not
eligible for titling and registration in the State for operation on the roads of the
state.27 Also at some point, DMV advised Baron that the vehicle was not eligible for
titling and registration pursuant to 21 Del. C. §2161(4) as the Minicab was unsafe
and unfit to be operated on the roads of the state.28 It appears that Baron was last
advised of the DMVâs decision on May 4, 2023.29 On May 8, 2023, Baron appealed
to this Court.30
7. Baron appeals DMVâs decision to deny the Minicab a certificate of title
and registration, specifically a âspecial farm vehicle registrationâ and an
25
Ans. Br. at 4, D.I. 14.
26
Id.
27
Id. at 3.
28
Id. at 3-4.
29
Id. at 7.
30
Id.
5
accompanying âFVâ tag. Baron asserts that his Minicab meets all requirements
under 21 Del. C. § 2113, so DMV may not deny title and registration for the
Minicab.31 Baron also argues that DMV does not have the authority to require
âspecial farm vehicle registrationâ safety standards beyond those listed in 21 Del. C.
§ 2113.32 Further, Baron argues that to do so would violate 21 Del. C. § 302.33
Lastly, Baron asserts that DMV may not classify the Minicab as an OHV because
the vehicle does not meet the statutory definition for an OHV.34
8. DMV denied title and registration of the Minicab based upon DMVâs
interpretation of Title 21 of the Delaware Code, Delaware Department of
Transportation regulations regarding imported vehicles, and national guidance to not
title or register mini trucks for operation on public roads.35 DMV argues pursuant
to 21 Del. C. §316, §2301, §2312, and §2161, that it has statutory authority to deny
title and registration of the Minicab for on-road use. Further, DMV argues that 21
Del. C § 302(a) provides the regulatory authority for 2 Del. Admin. C. § 2278, which
requires a Certificate of Compliance to title and register certain imported vehicles.
DMV contends that it did not exceed its statutory authority when denying title and
registration for the Minicab. DMV asserts that it properly determined the Minicab
31
Op. Br. at 4, D.I. 11.
32
Id. at 6.
33
Id.
34
Ans. Br. at 7, D.I. 14.
35
Id. at 1.
6
may be registered as an OHV, and categorizing the Minicab as such would not
conflict with the statutory definition of an OHV or even Baronâs intended use of the
Minicab.
9. Baron replies that 49 CFR 591.5(i) exempts the Minicab from the
Certificate of Compliance so it may be imported for road use.36 Baron makes an
assertion not stated in his opening brief or referenced in the DMVâs answering brief
that DMV has previously titled a vehicle of the same make and model and issued it
a âVFâ tag.37
10. In a subsequent letter to the Court, DMV responds only to Baronâs new
reply brief assertion.38 DMV states that this assertion was not part of the record
below, and it should not be considered by the Court for the first time on appeal.39
For clarification on DMVâs position - that they do not title and register this type of
vehicle for on-road use - DMV provides the affidavit of DMV Deputy Director
Karen A. Carson (âCarsonâ).40 Carsonâs affidavit states that a volunteer firefighterâs
âVFâ tag was issued for a 2001 F-350 and it is not presently a validly-issued license
plate.41 The license plate is âin retention,â meaning it is no longer associated with
36
Reply Br. at 3, 5, D.I. 15.
37
Id. at 1.
38
See DMVâs Letter to the Court dated Sept. 12, 2023, D.I. 18.
39
Id. at 1.
40
Id.
41
See Carson Aff. Âś 8, D.I. 18.
7
any legally registered motor vehicle.42 Further, DMV has notified the prior holder
of the violation.43
11. Appeals from DMVâs refusal to title a motor vehicle must be filed in
the Superior Court.44 Appeals from DMV ârefusing, rescinding, canceling or
suspending the registration of any motor vehicleâ must also be filed with the
Superior Court.45
12. âThe scope of review of an appeal from an administrative decision of
the Division of Motor Vehicles is limited to correcting errors of law and determining
whether substantial evidence of record exists to support the findings of fact and
conclusions of law.â46 The Delaware Supreme Court has found that â[f]indings of
fact will not be overturned on appeal as long as they are sufficiently supported by
the record and are the product of an orderly and logical deductive process.â47 If there
is substantial evidence in the record, the âcourt may not reweigh it and substitute its
own judgmentâ for the judgment of the agency.48 The Delaware Supreme Court has
42
Id. Âś 9.
43
Id. Âś 10.
44
21 Del. C. § 2314.
45
21 Del. C. § 2163.
46
Eskridge v. Voshell, 1991 WL 78471, at *2 (Del. 1991) (citing Levitt v. Bouvier,287 A.2d 671
(Del. 1972)). 47Id.
(citations omitted). 48 Janaman v. New Castle County Bd. of Adjustment,364 A.2d 1241, 1242
(Del.
1976).
8
stated that it will âaccord due weightâ to the decision of an agencyâs interpretation
of a statute it is empowered to administer.49
13. Baronâs principal argument is that the vehicle complies with 21 Del. C
§ 2113(2)(g)(3)50 - âThe vehicle or trailer is properly equipped with a stop light, turn
signals and brakes which are in a safe operating condition.â51 Baronâs argument fails
to consider the statute in totality. A â[s]pecial farm vehicle registration . . . is for
identification only and does not constitute being âregisteredâ in this State[.]â52 Even
if Baron meets all requirements in §2113(2)(g)(3), the requirements for vehicle
registration have not necessarily been met.
14. Other statutes provide additional registration requirements. Section
316 provides that Title 21 of the Delaware Code applies to every motor vehicle with
respect to titling and registration.53 Section 2301(a) provides that the titling of a
vehicle must come before the registration of a vehicle. In certain cases, DMV may
statutorily refuse a certificate of title under §2161 and a vehicleâs registration under
§2312.
15. Some regulations may also provide additional requirements. Baron
states that the legislature granted the Secretary of the Delaware Department of
49
Public Water Supply Co. v. DiPasquale, 735 A.2d 378, 382 (Del. 1999).
50
Op. Br. at 4-5, D.I. 11.
51
21 Del. C. § 2113(2)(g)(3).
52
21 Del. C. § 2113(2)(a).
53
21 Del. C. § 316(1-3) provides exceptions.
9
Transportation, not DMV, the authority to draft rules and regulations. While this
statement is true, DMV may enforce these rules and regulations. As an agency of
the Delaware Department of Transportation, DMV is ultimately directed by the
Secretary of Transportation. The enabling statute for Delaware Department of
Transportationâs regulatory authority provides that the Secretary of Transportation
âmay designate such agencies as may be necessary to carry out this title[.]â54
16. In certain cases, Regulation 2278, subsection 1.1 requires
Certification(s) of Compliance to title or register an imported vehicle for the use on
roads in this State.55 Certification(s) of Compliance must now comply with U.S.
DOT safety standard and U.S. EPA standards (for emissions).56 This language
indicates that importation exemptions will not bypass the requirements for
complying with U.S. DOT safety standards and EPA standards for emissions.
Regulation 2278 also does not suggest that Baronâs forms mandate that DMV title
or register the Minicab for use on the roads of this State. His forms do not act as
Certifications of Compliances since they do not comply with U.S. DOT safety
54
21 Del. C. § 302(a).
55
This regulation does ânot apply to foreign vehicles which have a âuniformâ
Manufacturer' Statement of Origin accompanying the title application. These
MSOs are all printed in English language and are the same type that accompany all
domestic cars which are manufactured in the United States.â 2 Del. Admin. C. §
2278, subsection 1.3.
56
2 Del. Admin. C. § 2278, subsection 1.2.
10
standard and EPA standards for emissions. Baronâs completed forms simply allow
the importation of the Minicab into the United States.
17. Additionally, requiring U.S. DOT safety standards and EPA standards
for emissions for titling does not violate §2113. Under §302(a): âNo rule or
regulation adopted pursuant to the authority granted by this section shall extend,
modify or conflict with any law of this State, or the reasonable implications thereof.â
Regulation 2278 does not extend, modify or conflict with §2133 because a âspecial
farm vehicle registrationâ is for âidentification only,â and not for the issuance of a
certificate of title registration.57
18. Next, the Court turns to Baronâs argument that the Minicab is not an
OHV. Section 101(46) defines OHVs, stating in part: ââOHV[s]â [do] not include a
farm vehicle being used for farming[.]â58 Despite allowing âspecial farm vehicle
registration,â the legislature does not define âfarm vehicle.â59
19. An OHV may be registered for use on private property but not roads if
it is âused or intended to be used solely upon private property which must cross or
use the public highway only incidentally in order to gain access from one portion of
such property to another.â60 Baronâs intention to use the vehicle as a farm vehicle
57
21 Del. C. § 2113(2)(a).
58
21 Del. C. § Ch. 68 is about the registration of OHVs.
59
21 Del C. §316(2).
60
â(2) Any vehicle used or in
11
does not make it one either by statute or by regulation. The Court accords âdue
weightâ to DMVâs decision to allow the Minicab to be registered as an OHV.
For the reasons set out above, the Court concludes that the Department of
Motor Vehicleâs decision is supported by substantial evidence and free from legal
error. Therefore, the decision is AFFIRMED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Ferris W. Wharton
Ferris W. Wharton, J.
12