EFS, Inc., d/b/a Quik Pawn Shop v. Lee [Ms. SC-2025-0191, Jan. 30, 2026] __ So. 3d ___ (Ala. 2026). The Court (Stewart, C.J., and Bryan, Sellers, Mendheim, Cook, McCool, and Parker, JJ., concur; Shaw, J., concurs in the result) reverse the Jefferson Circuit Court’s judgment in favor of the Lees and renders a judgment in favor of Quik Pawn.
The homeowners sued Quik Pawn alleging negligence and wantonness, asserting that the pawnshop failed to follow the Alabama Pawnshop Act and local reporting ordinances and failed to properly screen or report suspicious transactions. A jury returned a verdict for the homeowners on their wantonness claim and awarded punitive damages, and Quik Pawn appealed, arguing that the trial court should have entered a judgment as a matter of law in its favor because the Lees failed to prove all the elements of wantonness. Ms. *1-4.
The Court focuses on whether the plaintiffs present substantial evidence that Quik Pawn’s alleged wanton conduct proximately caused their loss. Under Alabama law, wantonness requires proof of a conscious or reckless act that proximately causes the plaintiff’s injury. Although the plaintiffs presented evidence that Quik Pawn may not have strictly complied with statutory and municipal reporting requirements, the Court holds that they failed to show those alleged violations caused their inability to recover the stolen property. The undisputed evidence showed that the plaintiffs had not discovered or reported the theft when the items were sold, and by the time the theft was reported, the property had already been lawfully resold and was unrecoverable. Ms. *5-10.
Because the plaintiffs failed to establish proximate causation, the Court holds that the trial court should have entered judgment as a matter of law for Quik Pawn. The Court reverses the judgment and renders judgment in favor of Quik Pawn, reinforcing the principle that proof of statutory or ordinance violations alone is insufficient to sustain a wantonness claim absent evidence that such conduct proximately caused the plaintiff’s injury. Ms. *11-12.