Opinion

Alexsis, Inc. v. Terry

  • 675 So. 2d 1321
  • 1996 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 111
  • 1996 WL 76213
Court
Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama
Filed
Feb 23, 1996
Status
Published
Author
Monroe
On the bench
Sam A. Beatty
Cited by
5 cases
Authority
More cited than 15.1%

holding that the company administering a self-insurance program for the Department of Transportation was an agent for the Department and was, therefore, immune from suit

How later courts described this case

  • holding that the company administering a self-insurance program for the Department of Transportation was an agent for the Department and was, therefore, immune from suit

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

I disagree that Terry's claim against Alexsis, Inc. is barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity. Alexsis is a private enterprise hired by the state agency as an independent contractor to administer claims made by injured employees. Because it is an independent contractor, I do not believe that it is immune from lawsuits under the doctrine of sovereign immunity. As Justice Jones pointed out in his dissent in Ex parte Bowden , 574 So.2d 815 (Ala. 1991), until Bowden , sovereign immunity had not extended to independent contractors doing work for the state. I do not read anything in § 23-1-41 , the statute authorizing a self-insurance program for highway department employees, that precludes employees from bringing direct actions against the program's administrator to resolve disputed claims. To bar state highway employees from bringing such claims works a substantial injustice.

As Justices Jones and Shores conclude in their dissenting opinions in Ex parte Bowden , supra, and Alabama State Docks v. Saxon , 631 So.2d 943 (Ala. 1994), to prevent injured workers from bringing claims against independent contractors administering self-insurance programs by allowing the contractors to hide behind the "cloak" of sovereign immunity makes the insurance programs *Page 1324

seem nothing more than a sham and leaves workers at risk.

Because I do not believe that sovereign immunity can properly be extended to cover an independent contractor hired by a state agency, I must respectfully dissent.

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.