Case Title: Gaskin v. Republic Steel Corp.

Citation: 420 So. 2d 37

Docket Number: 

State: alabama

Court: Alabama Supreme Court

Date: 1982-09-24T00:00:00Z

Document:
420 So. 2d 37 (1982)
Patsy GASKIN
v.
REPUBLIC STEEL CORPORATION.
81-9.

Supreme Court of Alabama.
September 24, 1982.
*38 Clarence F. Rhea and Donald R. Rhea of Rhea, Boyd & Rhea, Gadsden, for appellant.
Roger C. Suttle of Inzer, Suttle, Swann & Stivender, Gadsden, for appellee.
ALMON, Justice.
Patsy Gaskin (Gaskin) appeals from a summary judgment on her action against Republic Steel Corporation (Republic).
Gaskin is an employee of Republic at its Gadsden, Alabama, plant. On October 4, 1979, after receiving permission to leave work early, Gaskin proceeded to the bathhouse on the premises of Republic's plant. While she was proceeding to the bathhouse, another employee of Republic, Gerald Faulkner, saw her and followed her. Once she was in the shower he attacked her and attempted to rape her. Her screams frightened him away but other plant employees soon apprehended him while still on the plant premises.
Gaskin filed this action against her assailant Faulkner and against Republic. Republic's motion for separate trials of the claims against it and of the claim against Faulkner was granted. Rule 42(b), A.R.C.P. Only the action against Republic is before this Court on this appeal.
Gaskin based her action against Republic upon the following paragraph of her complaint:
She alleged physical and emotional injuries "all as a proximate consequence of the negligence and wanton misconduct of the defendant corporation for failure to provide a safe and adequate place for plaintiff to work and shower," concurring with the misconduct of Faulkner.
Republic answered in part:
After other pleadings and affidavits the court granted summary judgment for Republic and denied Gaskin's motion to set aside the order granting summary judgment.
*39 Gaskin bases her argument on appeal on Parham v. Taylor, 402 So. 2d 884 (Ala.1981), and the case relied upon therein, Thoni Oil Magic Benzol Gas Stations, Inc. v. Johnson, 488 S.W.2d 355 (Ky.1972). In Parham this Court affirmed summary judgment for defendant employer, holding that the employer was not liable on the theory that he failed to adequately protect his employee from criminal assault. Gaskin seeks to distinguish Parham on the facts.
We find that the trial court correctly granted summary judgment for Republic. The test set out in Parham for imposing liability on an employer for assaults by third parties on his employees is
Parham v. Taylor, 402 So. 2d 884, 887 (Ala. 1981).
The shower maintained by Republic did not greatly and unreasonably increase the risk of harm to its female employees. These are not the extreme circumstances alluded to in Parham.
Republic states in its brief that Gaskin conceded that she had no cause of action under workmen's compensation statutes, and no contention in that regard is presented to this Court.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
TORBERT, C. J., and EMBRY, J., concur.
FAULKNER and ADAMS, JJ., concur in the result.