NACo Legal Advocacy: City of Buffalo et al. v. Kia/Hyundai

County Nexus

The question at hand in City of Buffalo et al. v. Kia/Hyundai is whether or not the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) preempts state tort claims brought forth by local governments alleging that Kia and Hyundai’s failure to install “reasonable” anti-theft technology constitutes negligence and public nuisance.  

Background

Design flaws in automobiles designed by Kia and Hyundai have led to a surge in theft of the vehicles, which has overwhelmed local law enforcement agencies and jeopardized public safety. Over a dozen local governments have sued Kia and Hyundai alleging that design flaws in their vehicles, such as the lack of engine immobilizers, make them highly susceptible to theft. The local governments involved in these suits assert claims of nuisance and public negligence, arguing that Kia and Hyundai were aware of these design flaws yet failed to take reasonable steps to prevent theft by incorporating various anti-theft technologies.  

Kia and Hyundai filed a motion to dismiss arguing that the local governments’ allegations were preempted under federal law. The auto manufacturers argue that the government’s claims rely on a theory that would require the manufacturers to use a particular engine immobilizer, which would in turn run afoul of their flexibility under the FMVSS. The district court rejected the motion to dismiss, stating that the governments were not arguing for a specific engine immobilizer, only that they violated their duty by not installing “reasonable anti-theft technology.” Kia and Hyundai are appealing that motion to dismiss.

NACo Advocacy  

In a Local Government Legal Center amicus brief in support f the plaintiff-appellees, which argues that the FMVSS does not preempt local governments from filing tort claims against Kia and Hyundai from failing to incorporate “reasonable anti-theft technology.” As local law enforcement agencies are frequently tasked with responding to the thefts caused by a lack of anti-theft technology, which requires a significant investment of time and financial resources, it is critical that local government authority is not preempted by the Court. Preserving the ability of local governments to seek recourse against corporate wrongdoing who have harmed the public safety of a community.  

Current Status

On June 20, 2025, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the lower court’s denial of Kia and Hyundai’s motion to dismiss. This is a significant victory for local governments, as it preserves the authority of cities and counties to file claims against manufacturers who fail to implement reasonable safety standards. The Circuit's opinion required additional input on the aspect of duty of care under New York's negligence law, and certified the question on whether or not the manufacturers owe the local governments of New York a duty of reasonable care in the design, manufacture and distribution of vehicles to the New York Court of Appeals, the highest court in the state. Still, this opinion from the Ninth Circuit will allow litigation to continue and help local governments recoup funds invested into law enforcement response to vehicle theft and holds manufacturers accountable for design flaws.