Avis Rent A Car Systems, LLC v. Ronnie Knox

── Avis Rent A Car Systems, LLC v. Ronnie Knox ── Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal Date: May 20, 2026 Category: General STATE OF LOUISIANA FIRST CIRCUIT ENT A CAR SYSTEMS, LLC AVIS ]?-.- VERSUS RONNIE KNOX Judgment Rendered: MAY 2 0 2026 On Appeal from the Baton Rouge City Court In and for the Parish of East Baton Rouge State of Louisiana Case No. 2402699 • Div. A Honorable Russell L. Jones, Pro Tempore Blake E. Oakes Counsel for Plaintiff A - ppellee, Metairie, Louisiana Avis Rent a Car Systems, LLC Raymond L. Simmons Counsel for Defendant -Appellant, Baton Rouge, Louisiana Ronnie Knox BEFORE: LANIER, WOLFE, AND HESTER, Ji. HESTER, J. Plaintiff, Avis Rent a Car Systems, LLC (" Avis"), filed a petition in Baton Rouge City Court on May 28, 2024, contending that defendant, Ronnie Knox, breached a rental agreement for the rental and use of a 2019 GMC Terrain vehicle") in failing to return the vehicle in the same condition that he received it Avis and in failing to accept responsibility for all loss or damage to the vehicle. sought $ 16, 717. 28, plus interest at the contractual rate of 18% per annum from the date ofjudicial demand, reasonable attorney' s fees, and all costs. Knox initially excepted to the petition, raising the objection of the failure to join an indispensable party. According to Knox, the vehicle was stolen at the time the vehicle was damaged, and Knox purchased insurance on the vehicle at the time he entered into the rental agreement. Knox argued that the " car thief and insurance company" were indispensable parties to the suit. After the exception was denied, Knox answered the petition. and asserted a third party demand. In his answer, Knox denied as written Avis' s allegation that damages were sustained to the vehicle while it was under his control and affirmatively alleged that " the vehicle was damaged while [ being] driven by someone not authorized by defendant and while insured by plaintiff or [ their] agent." Further, in its third party demand, Knox alleged that during the time the vehicle was rented by Knox, the vehicle was insured. Knox also alleged that during this time Marquis Bernard Knox took the vehicle without permission at which time it was damaged in an accident. On July 1, 2025, Avis filed a motion for summary judgment, seeking a judgment against Knox " for all sums due under the terms of the ` Rental Agreement' and any additional relief due under the law." The hearing was set for September 17, 2025. Knox opposed the summary judgment through an affidavit and memorandum, which were timely filed on September 2, 2025, fifteen days prior to the hearing. See La. Code Civ. P. art. 966( B)( 2). At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court 2 granted summary judgment in favor of Avis. The trial court' s ruling was memorialized and signed by judgment dated October 14, 2025. Knox timely appealed and assigns as error the trial court' s grant of Avis' s motion for summary judgment. LAW AND ANALYSIS A motion for summary judgment is a procedural device used when there is no genuine issue of material fact for all or part of the relief prayed for by a litigant. Beer Industry League of Louisiana v. City of New Orleans, 2018- 0280 ( La. 6/ 27/ 18), 251 So. 3d 380, 385- 86. After an opportunity for adequate disc