Court Opinion

ID: 9825485
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 13:12:35.259517+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:40:54.006049
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
Criticism is made of the foregoing opinion in the announcement made touching the application of section 32 of the Workmen’s Compensation Daw.
Attention is called to Steagall v. Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co., 205 Ala. 100, 87 So. 787. In that case it is held that, in a suit by employee against employer, the case is presumed to be governed by part 2 of that law, and should be brought thereunder, or the complaint should aver facts excepting the case therefrom. There was and is no purpose to depart from the rule there announced.
Section 32 covers two classes of cases wherein an employee sues a third person for wrongful injury: (1) When the third person sued, as well as the employer, are both subject to the provisions of part 2 of the act. In that case the amount of recovery is determined by the act. (2) When the third person is not subject to such provisions. In that case the suit xiroceeds and recovery is had as though the plaintiff was not an employee of some other person. There is no presumption that a tort-feasor, with whom plaintiff has no connection as employer and employee, is or is not subject to the provisions of the act. Whether he is or not is within his knowledge, rather than the knowledge of the injured party. We think the act does not place the burden on the injured party in such case to ascertain whether the defendant is entitled to have the recovery limited to the compensation provided in the Compensation Act. The defendant must become the actor, and bring himself within the class of third persons entitled to the benefits of the Compensation Law.
Application overruled.