Ex parte Wood

69 So. 3d 166 (Ala. 2010) · Supreme Court of Alabama · October 29, 2010 · No. 1090877

Summary

The Alabama Supreme Court reviewed a retaliatory-discharge claim brought by Ray Keith Wood against Black Creek, Inc. under Alabama Code § 25-5-11.1. The court held that disputed evidence concerning the reasons for Wood’s termination could support a finding that Black Creek’s stated reason was pretextual, and it reversed the Court of Civil Appeals’ judgment. The case was remanded for consideration of damages and other issues.

Court
Supreme Court of Alabama
Writing for the Court
Woodall, Justice; Cobb, Chief Justice; Lyons, Justice; Stuart, Justice; Smith, Justice; Bolin, Justice; Parker, Justice; Murdock, Justice; Shaw, Justice
Jurisdiction
Alabama
Decision date
October 29, 2010
Docket number
1090877
Procedural posture
Wood petitioned the Supreme Court of Alabama for certiorari review of a plurality decision of the Court of Civil Appeals reversing a trial-court judgment in his favor on his retaliatory-discharge claim.
Standard of review
The Supreme Court reviewed the Court of Civil Appeals' judgment for conflict with prior Alabama caselaw under Rule 39(a)(1)(D), and held that the trial court's finding of pretext could not be rejected as a matter of law without impermissibly reweighing the evidence. The opinion also notes that rulings on motions for judgment on partial findings in a bench trial ordinarily receive ore tenus review.
Precedential value
Published opinion; precedential
Parties
Ray Keith Wood v. Black Creek, Inc.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded

Topics

workers compensationretaliationwrongful terminationappellate procedureremedies

Practice areas

workers compensationemployment lawretaliatory discharge

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Court of Civil Appeals erred by holding, as a matter of law, that Black Creek had established a legitimate reason for Wood's discharge and that Wood lacked substantial evidence of pretext.
  2. Whether disputed evidence concerning the timing and reasons for Wood's termination created a fact question regarding whether Black Creek's stated reason was pretextual.
  3. Whether the case should be remanded for consideration of damages issues that the Court of Civil Appeals had not reached.

Holdings

  1. Although Wood's admitted use of the phrase that the supervisor could 'kiss his ass' could be treated as inappropriate workplace language and evidence of a legitimate reason for discharge, the conflicting evidence regarding the actual reason for termination and the timing of the employer's reliance on the alleged comments created a fact question as to pretext.
  2. An employee establishes a prima facie case of retaliatory discharge by showing an employment relationship, an on-the-job injury, the employer's knowledge of the injury, and termination based solely on the injury and the filing of a workers' compensation claim.
  3. The Court of Civil Appeals' judgment reversing the trial court and directing judgment for Black Creek was erroneous; the judgment was reversed and the case was remanded to the Court of Civil Appeals to address unresolved damages and mental-anguish issues.

Key quotations

In order for an employee to establish a prima facie case of retaliatory discharge the employee must show: 1) an employment relationship, 2) an on-the-job injury, 3) knowledge on the part of the employer of the on-the-job injury, and 4) subsequent termination of employment based solely upon the employee's on-the-job injury and the filing of a workers' compensation claim. (169)
We cannot say as a matter of law that the [trial court] could not have concluded that [Black Creek's] stated reason for [terminating Wood's employment] was pretextual without impermissibly reweighing the evidence. (172)

Factual background

Ray Keith Wood injured his forearm while working as a machinist for Black Creek and underwent authorized surgery. After returning to light-duty work, he left work early on several occasions for medical treatment and, on June 20, 2000, left work after reporting significant pain and attempting to obtain medical attention. Black Creek terminated his employment, asserting that he had left without permission and had made inappropriate or threatening comments about a supervisor; Wood disputed the comments and argued that the stated reasons were pretextual for retaliation based on his workers' compensation claim.

Procedural history

Wood sued Black Creek under Ala. Code § 25-5-11.1, alleging that he was discharged in retaliation for filing a workers' compensation claim. After a bench trial, the trial court entered judgment for Wood and awarded $50,000 in damages, later allocating the award between back wages and mental anguish. The Court of Civil Appeals reversed and remanded with instructions to enter judgment for Black Creek. The Supreme Court of Alabama granted certiorari, reversed the Court of Civil Appeals, and remanded for consideration of unresolved damages issues.

Remand instructions

Remanded to the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals for consideration of the issues regarding calculation of damages and the award of mental anguish, and for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…