Ex parte Austal USA, LLC

Summary

The Alabama Supreme Court denied two petitions for a writ of mandamus filed by Austal USA, LLC, seeking dismissal of employees' intentional-misconduct and related tort claims. The court held that, at the motion-to-dismiss stage, the employees' allegations that Austal specifically intended to injure them had to be accepted as true and could potentially invoke the narrow exception to the Longshore & Harbor Workers' Compensation Act's exclusivity provision. The court concluded that Austal had not shown a clear legal right to dismissal and allowed limited discovery concerning the applicability of the exclusivity defense.

Holdings

1. Mandamus review is available under the narrow exception for a motion to dismiss asserting an immunity defense based on workers' compensation exclusivity, including LHWCA exclusivity.
2. The LHWCA generally provides an employer's exclusive immunity from tort claims for work-related injuries, but an exceedingly narrow exception exists where the employer specifically intended or desired that the injury occur.
3. The plaintiffs' express allegations that Austal consciously and deliberately intended to injure them were sufficient to withstand Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal at that stage, even if the allegations appeared implausible or conclusory.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Supreme Court of Alabama could review by writ of mandamus the denial of Austal's Rule 12(b)(6) motions asserting immunity under the exclusivity provision of the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act.
2. Whether the plaintiffs' allegations of specific intent to injure were sufficient at the motion-to-dismiss stage to avoid dismissal under the LHWCA's exclusivity provision.
3. Whether Austal had demonstrated a clear legal right to dismissal before discovery concerning the alleged intent to injure.

Disposition

writ_denied