Ex parte Burkes Mechanical, In re: McCoy

Supreme Court of Alabama

Wilcox County | 306 So. 3d 1 | March 27, 2020


Defendant's Mandamus Petition Denied: Alleged Post-Accident Negligence Not Covered by Workers' Compensation Exclusivity Provisions

McCoy, an iron worker employed by Burkes, sustained severe burns while working at International Paper Company's ("IP") mill when a welding line ignited the air. Post-incident, instead of seeking immediate medical attention for McCoy, Burkes allegedly undertook various missteps, including not notifying IP's on-site emergency team, not calling an ambulance, applying an "improper substance" to the burns, and making multiple stops before reaching a hospital. Consequently, McCoy sued Burkes and others, claiming negligence, wantonness, and the tort of outrage. The essence of his claim against Burkes focused on the company's failure to provide adequate medical care post-accident. In response, Burkes sought the dismissal of McCoy's negligence and wantonness claims, citing the exclusive remedy provisions of the Alabama Workers' Compensation Act ("the Act").

Burkes argued that any injury resulting from the workplace accident fell under the Act's protection, limiting Burkes' civil liability. However, McCoy countered, suggesting his claims were based on injuries from actions following the accident, which he believed were not covered by the Act. The appellate court sided with McCoy, determining that his allegations, when viewed favorably, did not necessarily fall under the Act's protections, making it a fact-intensive inquiry. Moreover, the court declined to address the tort-of-outrage claim's dismissal as it wasn't raised appropriately by Burkes. Consequently, Burkes' petition for the writ of mandamus was denied, as they failed to prove a clear legal right to have McCoy's tort claims dismissed.

Additional Reading

Other Decisions Regarding Similar Topics:

-Navigation-
-Contact-
  • Phone: (205) 335-4190
  • Fax: (205) 278-5875
  • Email: thompsonfirm.al.law@gmail.com