Rel: 07/0 3/2014

Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter . Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions , Alabama Appellate Courts, 300 Dexter Avenue, Montgomery, Alabama 36104-3741 ((334) 229- 0649), of any typographical or other errors, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is printed in Southern Reporter . 

# SUPREME COURT OF ALA BAMA

SPECIAL TERM, 2 014

_____ _____ _____ _____ 11300 53

_____ _____ _____ _____ Fleetwood Truck ing C ompany, In c.

v. Cahab a Res ource s, LLC, and Crawford Ente rpris es, LLC

_____ _____ _____ _____ 11300 74

_____ _____ _____ _____ Cahab a Res ource s, LLC

v. Fleetwood Truck ing C ompany, In c. Appea ls fr om Tu scalo osa C ircui t Cou rt

(CV-1 3-900 811)

MAIN, Just ice.11300 53, 1 13007 4

11300 53 –- AFFI RMED. NO OPINI ON. See Rule 5 3(a)( 1) an d (a) (2)(F ), Al a. R. App. P. Stuar t, Bolin , Parke r, Shaw, Wise, and Bryan , JJ., concu r. Moore , C.J ., co ncurs spec ially . 11300 74 –- AFFI RMED. NO OPINI ON. See Rule 5 3(a)( 1) an d (a) (2)(F ), Al a. R. App. P. Moore , C.J., and Stuar t, Bolin , Parke r, S haw, Wise, and Bryan , JJ. , con cur.

21130053, 1130074

MOORE , Chief Justi ce (conc urrin g spe c i a l ly in case no. 11300 53). Fleet wood Truck ing Compa ny, Inc. ("Fle etwoo d"), sued Cahab a Re s o u r ces, LLC ("Cah aba") , and Crawf ord Enter prise s, LLC ("Cra wford "), in the Tusca loosa Circu it C o u rt, seeki ng indemnity for black -lung benef its the Unite d State s Depar tment of Labor order ed Fleet wood to pay a forme r emplo yee under the Black Lung Benef its Act, 30 U.S.C . § 901 et seq. The Depar tment of Labor 's rulin g is curre ntly on a p peal to the Unite d Sta tes C ourt of Ap peals for the E leven th Ci rcuit . The Tusca loosa Circu it Court dismi ssed Fleet wood' s actio n again st Cahab a and Crawf ord, subse quent emplo yers of the emplo yee, on the groun d that it lacke d subje ct-ma tter juris dicti on over the indemnity claim . Fle etwoo d nowappe als t o thi s Cou rt. I concu r in affir ming the judgm ent of the Tusca loo s a Circu it Court . I write separ ately becau se I do not belie ve the Tusca loosa Circu it Court lacke d subje ct-ma tter juris dicti on
over a common-l aw in demni ty cl aim. Rathe r, th e pro per g round for the judgm ent for Cahab a and Crawf ord and again st Fleet wood

was Fleet wood' s failu re to state a claim upo n w hich relie f could be grant ed becau se its clai m s , given the proce dural

31130053, 1130074

postu re ofthis case , are prem ature . See Rule 12(b )(6), Ala. R. Ci v. P. Alaba ma court s retai n subje ct-ma tter juris dicti on over indemni t y claim s. Preci sion Gear Co. v. Conti nenta l Motor s, Inc., 135 So. 3 d 953 , 960 (Ala . 201 3)("U nder Alaba ma la w, an indemnity claim is a tort claim ...." ); Amera da Hess Corp. v. Owens -Corn ing Fiber glass Corp. , 627 S o . 2d 367, 370 (Ala. 1993) (noti ng that "'ind emnit y shoul d be grant ed in any factu al situa tion in wh ich, as be tweenthe parti es th emsel ves, it is just an d fair that the indemnitor shoul d bear the total respo n sibil ity, rathe r than leave it on the indemnitee '" (quot ing Resta temen t (Seco nd) of Torts § 886 B (1977 ), cmt. c)). This Court has expla ined that subje ct-ma tter juris dicti on "conc erns a cou rt's powerto d ecide cert ain t ypes of ca ses." Ex parte Seymo ur, 946 S o . 2d 536, 538 (Ala. 2006) . Subje ctmatte r juris dicti on refer s to "[j]u risdi ction over the natur e of the case and the type of relie f s o u g h t." Black 's Law Dicti onary983 (10thed. 2014) (emph asis added ). "Juri sdict ion of the subje ct matte r is the power to hear and deter mine cases of the gener a l c lass to which the proce eding s in quest ion bel o n g. The princ iple of subje ct matte r juris dicti on relat es to a court 's inher ent autho rity to de a l with the case 41130053, 1130074

o r m a tter befor e it. The term means not simpl y juris dicti o n of the parti cular case then occup ying the atten tion of the court but juris dicti on of the class of cases to which the parti cu lar case belon gs." 21 C.J.S . Court s § 11 (2006 ). The Tusca loosa Circu it Court had subje ct-ma tter juris dicti on over Fleet wood' s claim s asser ting

commo n-law indemnific ation even if it did no t regar d those claim s as merit oriou s. Ex parte Safew ay Ins. Co. of Alabama, [Ms. 11204 39, Octob er 4, 2013] ___ So. 3d ___, ___ (Ala. 2013) ("The re are ... n o p roble ms with subje ct-ma tter j u risdi ction merel y becau se a party files an actio n th a t

o stens ibly lacks a proba bilit y of merit ."). There for e , m y
concu rrenc e shoul d not be taken as uphol ding the Tusca loosa Circu it Court 's deter minat ion t h a t it lacke d subje ct-ma tter juris di c t ion over Fleet wood' s indemnity claim s. I belie ve Fleet wood' s actio n is prema ture becau se Fleet wood has appea led to the Unite d State s Court of Appea ls for the Eleve nth Circu it for relie f from the D e p a rtmen t of Labor 's rulin g that, if grant ed, would rende r the prese nt indemnific ation actio n moot. Shoul d th e C ourt of Appea ls rule again st Fleet wood, Fleet wood' s act ion f or co mmon- law i ndemn ity w ould be vi able.

51130053, 1130074

In light of the foreg oing, I concu r to affir m the judgm ent of the T uscal oosa Circu it Co urt.

6