Alabama Appellate Opinions Released March 17, 2017
We are committed to sharing decisions and providing legal updates that may be beneficial to you and your teams. Included below are summaries of cases recently released by Alabama Appellate Courts. Please reach out to any member of our Appellate Practice group with any questions.

Warm regards,
Team Huie

Alabama Appellate Opinions Released 
March 17, 2017
Alabama Supreme Court

Motion to Compel Arbitration 

Robert O. Newell v. SCI Alabama Funeral Services, LLC, and Richard T. Johnson III

Appellant (“Newell”) appealed from an Order compelling him to arbitration. The contract at issue involved funeral services for Newell’s wife. Newell argued that the arbitration provision was “unconscionable” and therefore void, because, he said, the terms of the provision are grossly favorable to SCI. The Supreme Court examined the exact language of the arbitration provision and held that it was not “unconscionable” because “the arbitration provision was not overly broad so as to include every conceivable claim that could arise between Newell and SCI because the arbitration provision in part three is expressly limited to the transaction contemplated by the contract.”

Additionally, the Court rejected Plaintiff’s argument that the funeral home held “overwhelming bargaining power” over the grieving spouse, as nothing prevented the spouse from using a different funeral home. Crucial to the Court’s conclusion on this point was that Newell failed to present evidence that he tried alternative sources for this service.  Accordingly, the Court held that “[a]lthough a party would not have to spend a considerable amount of time and effort to find alternatives, Alabama Courts, nevertheless, do require that a party ‘shop around’ in order to show that there was no meaningful alternative.'" 

    Alabama Court of Civil Appeals

    Workers' Compensation

    Brewton Area Young Men's Christian Association, Inc. v. Georgia H. Lanier

    On December 19, 2012, Georgia H. Lanier ("the employee") was preparing to leave the premises of her employer, Brewton Area Young Men's Christian Association, Inc. ("the employer"), when she fell behind her desk. The employee suffered comminuted introchanteric and subtrochanteric fractures in her left hip. The employee sued the employer in the Escambia Circuit Court ("the trial court"), seeking workers' compensation benefits. After a trial, the trial court entered a judgment concluding that the employee's injury was compensable, determining that the employee is permanently and totally disabled, calculating the employee's average weekly wage, ordering the employer to pay medical benefits, and awarding the employee temporary and permanent workers' compensation benefits.

    The employer challenged the trial court's conclusion that the employee proved legal causation of her injury. Namely, that the cause of the fall was not due to Plaintiff’s tripping on her desk chair. The Court held that although the evidence regarding the cause of the employee's fall was disputed and, at times, might have appeared inconsistent, the trial court chose to believe the employee's testimony about the fall. Accordingly, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court that there was “substantial evidence” as to legal causation.

    The employer next contended that the trial court erred in concluding that it had received proper notice under Ala. Code 1975, § 25-5-78. The employer argued that although it had notice of the fall, it did not have notice that Plaintiff was contending the fall was work related. However, because the worker had an investigator look into the fall, and reported the fall to its workers' compensation insurance carrier, the Court held that there was in fact “actual notice” such that the notice provision was satisfied. 

      "The leading rule for the lawyer, as for the man of every other calling, is diligence. Leave nothing for to-morrow which can be done to-day. Never let your correspondence fall behind."    ~ Abraham Lincoln
      Huie Appellate Practice
      No representation is made that the quality of legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.
      Huie: Stand Firm