Summary
The Supreme Court of Alabama held that receiving workers' compensation benefits does not, by itself, bar an employee from recovering underinsured-motorist benefits under an employer's automobile insurance policy. Because the employee was injured by an alleged third-party tortfeasor, the Workers' Compensation Act's exclusive-remedy and co-employee-immunity provisions did not bar the claim against the employer's insurer. The court reversed the dismissal and remanded for further proceedings, without deciding whether the employee was otherwise entitled to recover under the policy.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Alabama Workers' Compensation Act bars an employee who received workers' compensation benefits after being injured by a negligent third party while driving an employer-owned vehicle from pursuing underinsured-motorist benefits under the employer's automobile insurance policy.
- Whether the trial court properly dismissed Johnson's claim against Coregis under Rule 12(b)(6).
Holdings
- The Alabama Workers' Compensation Act does not bar an employee injured by a third party from recovering underinsured-motorist benefits under the employer's automobile insurance policy merely because the employee has received workers' compensation benefits.
- Dismissal was improper because, assuming Johnson was covered by the employer's underinsured-motorist policy, the complaint was not barred as a matter of law by his receipt of workers' compensation benefits.
Key quotations
“"legally entitled to recover" means that '"the insured must be able to establish fault on the part of the uninsured motorist, which gives rise to damages and must be able to prove the extent of those damages.'” (888 So. 2d at 1235)
“Assuming that Johnson is covered by his employer's underinsured-motorist insurance policy, we see nothing in the Act that would bar Johnson from recovering those insurance benefits to which he may be entitled.” (888 So. 2d at 1236)
“Our decision pertains only to the trial court's determination that the Act bars Johnson's claim against Coregis for underinsured-motorist benefits.” (888 So. 2d at 1236)
Factual background
Johnson was employed by the Cullman County Commission to transport juvenile offenders. While driving a Commission vehicle within the scope of his employment, he was seriously injured in a collision caused by another driver, James Kimble Lovette. Johnson received workers' compensation benefits and alleged that the Commission's Coregis automobile policy covered the vehicle and provided underinsured-motorist coverage.
Procedural history
Johnson sued the alleged tortfeasor and Coregis, seeking damages and underinsured-motorist benefits after receiving workers' compensation benefits. The trial court dismissed Coregis under Rule 12(b)(6), ruling that workers' compensation was Johnson's sole remedy, and later dismissed the remaining claims after Johnson settled with the alleged tortfeasor. Johnson appealed the dismissal of Coregis to the Supreme Court of Alabama.
Remand instructions
Further proceedings consistent with the opinion; the decision addresses only whether the Workers' Compensation Act bars Johnson's claim against Coregis and does not decide coverage, insured status, policy exclusions, liability, or damages.