Oliver v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.

Supreme Court of Alabama

Oliver v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.

548 So. 2d 1025, 1989 Ala. LEXIS 539, 1989 WL 107137

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedJuly 21, 1989

Docket88-596

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 548 So. 2d 1025 (Oliver v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Oliver v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 548 So. 2d 1025, 1989 Ala. LEXIS 539, 1989 WL 107137 (Ala. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

Wilbur Oliver brought an action against Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, alleging *Page 1026 the tort of outrageous conduct. After a workplace injury on October 28, 1986, Oliver paid his medical bills of $11.00 and $89.60. Liberty Mutual, his employer's workmen's compensation insurance carrier, reimbursed him promptly for the $11.00 expenditure, but allegedly did not reimburse the $89.60 before Oliver filed this action on October 16, 1987. Liberty Mutual's evidence indicated that it did promptly send a check for the $89.60 claim but that that check was never cashed. The claim was filed in late December 1986 or early January 1987. Oliver asserts that he inquired by telephone about the $89.60 claim, but he does not recall to whom he spoke. His only written inquiry was made by his attorney and was dated September 3, 1987.

This Court has held that a claim for bad faith failure to pay an insurance claim in the context of workmen's compensation claims is barred by the workmen's compensation exclusivity provisions, but that a claim based on the tort of outrage is not barred. Nabors v. St. Paul Ins. Co., 489 So.2d 573 (Ala. 1986); Garvin v. Shewbart, 442 So.2d 80 (Ala. 1983). The facts alleged herein, however, do not state an actionable claim of outrage. See American Road Service Co. v. Inmon, 394 So.2d 361 (Ala. 1980). Therefore, the trial court did not err in entering summary judgment for Liberty Mutual.

AFFIRMED.

HORNSBY, C.J., and MADDOX, ADAMS and STEAGALL, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Wilbur Oliver brought an action against Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, alleging *Page 1026 the tort of outrageous conduct. After a workplace injury on October 28, 1986, Oliver paid his medical bills of $11.00 and $89.60. Liberty Mutual, his employer's workmen's compensation insurance carrier, reimbursed him promptly for the $11.00 expenditure, but allegedly did not reimburse the $89.60 before Oliver filed this action on October 16, 1987. Liberty Mutual's evidence indicated that it did promptly send a check for the $89.60 claim but that that check was never cashed. The claim was filed in late December 1986 or early January 1987. Oliver asserts that he inquired by telephone about the $89.60 claim, but he does not recall to whom he spoke. His only written inquiry was made by his attorney and was dated September 3, 1987.

This Court has held that a claim for bad faith failure to pay an insurance claim in the context of workmen's compensation claims is barred by the workmen's compensation exclusivity provisions, but that a claim based on the tort of outrage is not barred. Nabors v. St. Paul Ins. Co., 489 So.2d 573 (Ala. 1986); Garvin v. Shewbart, 442 So.2d 80 (Ala. 1983). The facts alleged herein, however, do not state an actionable claim of outrage. See American Road Service Co. v. Inmon, 394 So.2d 361 (Ala. 1980). Therefore, the trial court did not err in entering summary judgment for Liberty Mutual.

AFFIRMED.

HORNSBY, C.J., and MADDOX, ADAMS and STEAGALL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

548 So. 2d 1025, 1989 Ala. LEXIS 539, 1989 WL 107137, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oliver-v-liberty-mut-ins-co-ala-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack