Ex Parte Ampro Products, In re: Colvin

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Pickens County | 252 So. 3d 683 | Oct. 13, 2017

Court Rules on Workers' Compensation Case, Addressing Claims of Perjury and Costs

In a workers' compensation dispute initiated on September 18, 2015, an employee sought compensation benefits from their employer. Following a hearing in April 2017, the employee provided a list of expenses for reimbursement, while the employer moved for dismissal under Rule 41(b), Ala. R. Civ. P., alleging the employee committed perjury. In June 2017, the trial court recognized the employee's injury as compensable and mandated the employer to cover the costs. The employer sought reconsideration concerning costs, which was denied, and then appealed via a writ of mandamus.

The employer's primary argument was the trial court's error in not dismissing the employee's complaint due to alleged perjury. However, the court found the employee's inaccuracies unintentional, and any employer's disadvantage was countered during cross-examination. Thus, the trial court's refusal to dismiss the case was upheld.

The employer further contended there was insufficient evidence for the injury's compensability. However, due to the incomplete submission of relevant evidence by the employer, the court couldn't determine the lack of substantial evidence, denying the employer's petition on this.

Lastly, regarding costs, the court agreed with the employer on specific items. It ruled that the costs of the employee's vocational expert deposition, mediation fees, private investigator fees for serving a subpoena, and the third-party service for medical records were improperly taxed against the employer.