Ex Parte Workers Compensation Self-Ins. v. Harding

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Cullman County | 227 So. 3d 528 | Jan. 6, 2017


Venue Dispute in Workers' Compensation Case Results in Mandamus Relief

In June 2016, the AGC Fund initiated a complaint against Harding in the trial court, contending that Harding was not eligible for benefits under the Workers' Compensation Act. The AGC Fund, a pooled-risk self-insurer, had provided workers' compensation coverage to Good Hope, Harding's alleged employer. Harding had filed a workers' compensation claim with Good Hope, which the AGC Fund contested.

In response, Harding, on August 2, 2016, filed a motion to dismiss the case based on improper venue, or alternatively, to transfer it to Jefferson County. He argued that the case should be in Jefferson County, his place of residence, or Walker County, where the injury happened. Harding further presented a counterclaim against the AGC Fund and a cross-claim against Good Hope, asserting entitlement to workers' compensation benefits and alleging retaliatory discharge by Good Hope.

The AGC Fund and Good Hope countered that the proper venue was determined not by the general statute Harding cited, but by the Workers' Compensation Act and a statute relating to actions against corporations. As per their assertion, Cullman County, where Good Hope has its principal business, was the correct venue.

After a hearing, the trial court transferred the case to the Jefferson Circuit Court. Disagreeing, the AGC Fund and Good Hope sought a writ of mandamus.

Considering the standard of review and laws governing venue, it was determined that Cullman County was the correct venue. As such, the court granted the petition for a writ of mandamus, directing the trial court to reverse its decision.

Other Decisions Regarding Similar Topics:

-Navigation-
-Contact-
  • Phone: (205) 335-4190
  • Fax: (205) 278-5875
  • Email: thompsonfirm.al.law@gmail.com