Case Title: Cole v. Cooper

Citation: 437 So. 2d 1257

Docket Number: 

State: alabama

Court: Alabama Supreme Court

Date: 1983-09-02T00:00:00Z

Document:
437 So. 2d 1257 (1983)
Jimmy COLE
v.
George A. COOPER.
82-829.

Supreme Court of Alabama.
September 2, 1983.
John L. Sims, Hartselle, for appellant.
Ralph E. Slate, Decatur, for appellee.
SHORES, Justice.
This is an appeal by the plaintiff from a summary judgment entered for the defendant in a defamation action. We affirm.
Plaintiff Cole worked as a maintenance man for Roselawn Cemetery, Inc. He was discharged in early 1981. Defendant Cooper is an accountant who handles Roselawn's books, including filling out and filing forms with the Department of Industrial Relations. By affidavit, which was not contradicted, he said:
It was not disputed that Cooper acted solely as the agent for the employer in submitting the forms to the Department. He did not know Mr. Cole.
Section 25-4-116, Code 1975, provides in part:
Clearly, under this statute, the communication from Cooper, acting as agent for the employer, was privileged. Whether it is an absolute privilege or merely a qualified one, we have not decided and need not decide here, because there is no suggestion by the plaintiff or anyone on his behalf that the statements made were attended with malice or ill will.
Dent v. Smith, 414 So. 2d 77, 78-79 (Ala. 1982).
Here, as in Dent, the movant showed that there was no set of facts which could be shown, not even a scintilla, which would constitute a genuine issue on the question of malice on the part of Cooper; therefore, if the statutory privilege is only a qualified one, the defendant has carried his burden, and summary judgment was proper.
AFFIRMED.
TORBERT, C.J., and MADDOX, JONES and BEATTY, JJ., concur.