Opinion ID: 1702279
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Intentional Failure to Provide a Safe Workplace

Text: Count two in Sealy's complaint alleges that the petitioners failed to provide him with a safe workplace. Since Sealy filed his complaint, this Court has decided Ex parte Progress Rail Services Corp., 869 So.2d 459 (Ala.2003), which, according to Sealy's attorney, makes Sealy's claim difficult to maintain. Sealy's attorney wrote a letter to the trial court stating that plaintiff, Sealy, does not object to Count 2 of the complaint being dismissed with prejudice. The trial court has not dismissed that count of the complaint despite the letter from Sealy's attorney. The petitioners ask us to review this failure to dismiss the count. However, the petitioners and Sealy are free to sign a stipulation of dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(ii), Ala. R. Civ. P., a method procedurally more proper than seeking the extraordinary remedy of a writ of mandamus. Therefore, we decline to issue the writ as to the trial court's failure to dismiss the claim alleging intentional failure to provide a safe workplace. PETITIONS DENIED. SEE, LYONS, BROWN, JOHNSTONE, HARWOOD, and STUART, JJ., concur. WOODALL, J., concurs in the result.