Opinion

Collins v. Taco Bell Corp.

  • 689 So. 2d 863
  • 1996 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 626
  • 1996 WL 479151
Court
Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama
Filed
Aug 23, 1996
Status
Published
Author
Robertson
On the bench
Yates, Crawley, Robertson
Cited by
3 cases
Authority
More cited than 0.6%

Robertson, P.J., concurring specially and noting that, under Argo Construction Co., a "trial court has the authority to hold the employer in contempt and to order an award of fees to the injured employee's attorney" (emphasis added)

How later courts described this case

  • Robertson, P.J., concurring specially and noting that, under Argo Construction Co., a "trial court has the authority to hold the employer in contempt and to order an award of fees to the injured employee's attorney" (emphasis added)

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

ROBERTSON, Presiding Judge

(concurring specially).

I write to note that although I agree with the majority that the common fund doctrine is not available in this case, attorneys representing injured employees may have another route to recover fees. If Taco Bell had been directed by a worker’s compensation judgment to pay Collins’s medical expenses, it could have been liable for attorney fees in a civil contempt proceeding. In the case of Argo Const. Co. v. Rich, 603 So.2d 1078 (Ala.Civ.App.1992), this court recognized that where an employer willfully and contumaciously refuses to pay an injured employee’s medical expenses pursuant to a judgment by the trial court, the trial court has the authority to hold the employer in contempt and to order an award of fees to the injured employee’s attorney.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.