Opinion ID: 1900435
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: george self

Text: George Self contends he was injured while fulfilling the duties of his employment with J.O. Bennett Lumber Company (Bennett Lumber) on 13 May 1982. Self promptly received benefits from his employer's workmen's compensation carrier, Corporate Insurance Group Service of Alabama, from 13 May 1982 through 7 July 1982, when the benefits were abruptly discontinued. On 7 July 1982, when Self went to the premises of his employer, to inquire as to the reason for the termination of his benefits, he was informed by James Bennett, of Bennett Lumber, that he was fired. The reasons given for Self's termination by Bennett were that Self would not return to work and, as stated by Bennett, You are causing our insurance rates to go up because of your back injury. On 6 July 1983, Self filed an action for workmen's compensation benefits against Bennett Lumber. In addition, he stated tort claims against Bennett Lumber and Corporate Insurance for wrongful refusal to pay benefits; bad faith breach of contract; conspiracy and collusion between the defendants to deprive him of workmen's compensation benefits; intentional infliction of emotional distress; and the tort of outrage. A motion for summary judgment, based on this court's decision in Waldon v. Hartford Insurance Group, supra , was filed on behalf of the carrier and Bennett Lumber. Summary judgment was granted as to all claims except Self's claim for workmen's compensation benefits. Self appeals that grant of final summary judgment. These cases reveal a pattern of inequities caused by this court's current interpretations of the exclusivity provision of Alabama's Workmen's Compensation Act, and the employment-at-will doctrine.