Brooks v. AUSTAL USA, LLC

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Mobile County | 297 So. 3d 434 | Dec. 6, 2019

Court Reverses Dismissal of Worker's Compensation Claim Due to Address Mix-up in Service Process

Brooks, after allegedly suffering a workplace injury in 2016 while employed by Austal, sought workers' compensation benefits in 2018. Austal challenged Brooks's claim, pointing to a delay in proper service. Brooks initially directed the summons to Austal's former registered agent, resulting in a failed service attempt. He corrected this mistake approximately seven months later, successfully serving Austal. Austal contended that Brooks's action fell outside of the two-year statute of limitations for such claims, as Brooks, they argued, didn't show genuine intent to immediately serve Austal. Austal used evidence that Brooks should have been aware of Austal's correct service address, suggesting Brooks's delay indicated no intent to timely serve.

Brooks, in defense, demonstrated he intended to serve Austal immediately, supporting this with the fact that he instructed for immediate service upon complaint filing. Brooks's attorney attributed the initial incorrect service address to a recent change in Austal's registered agent, noting prior successful service to the old address in an unrelated case.

The trial court sided with Austal and dismissed Brooks's complaint. However, the appellate court, referencing precedent, established that if a complaint is filed with a genuine intent for immediate service, it commences an action for satisfying the statute of limitations, even if there's a subsequent delay in achieving correct service. Therefore, the court concluded that Brooks's action was within the limitations period and reversed the trial court's judgment, remanding the case for further proceedings.