224 F.Supp. 87 (N.D.Ala. 1963), Civ. A. 63-119, Crider v. Zurich Ins. Co.

Docket Nº:Civ. A. 63-119
Citation:224 F.Supp. 87
Party Name:Crider v. Zurich Ins. Co.
Case Date:May 16, 1963
Court:United States District Courts, 11th Circuit, Northern District of Alabama
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 87

224 F.Supp. 87 (N.D.Ala. 1963)

Thomas J. CRIDER, Plaintiff,

v.

ZURICH INSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation, Defendant.

Civ. A. No. 63-119.

United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, Southern Division.

May 16, 1963

Max C. Pope, of Levine, Fulford & Gwaltney, and J. Terry Huffstutler, Birmingham, Ala., for plaintiff.

Foster Etheredge, of Spain, Gillon & Young, Birmingham, Ala., for defendant.

GROOMS, District Judge.

This matter came on for hearing at this time upon the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and upon the defendant's motion to dismiss.

From the proceedings herein, the following facts appear to be undisputed:

Plaintiff, Thomas J. Crider, while an employee of Lawler Construction Company, Inc., a Georgia corporation, was injured on the 11th day of July, 1956, in DeKalb County, Alabama. Both Crider and Lawler were under and subject to the Workmen's Compensation Act of Georgia, Code, § 114-101 et seq., at the time the former was injured. Crider instituted a suit against Lawler in the Circuit Court of DeKalb County, Alabama, seeking recovery under three counts, the first count being under the Alabama Compensation law, Code of Ala., Tit. 26, § 253 et seq., and Counts Two and Three being under the common law.

On February 11, 1959, Crider amended his complaint striking all of the original counts and his demand for a jury trial, and added Count A under the Georgia Compensation law. On the following day judgment by default was entered against Lawler for the sum of $10,500, together with costs.

The defendant herein, Zurich Insurance Company, a corporation, was the Workman's Compensation insurer of Lawler. It claims that the Circuit Court of DeKalb County, Alabama, was without jurisdiction of the subject matter, and that this action cannot be maintained

Page 88

against Zurich who is in privity with Lawler, and that the judgment is void.

The Court has heard oral argument, has considered the briefs and reviewed the authorities, and is of the opinion that the defendant's contention is well taken.

In Green v. J. A. Jones Const. Co., 161 F.2d 359, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, held that the Circuit Court of Hinds County, Mississippi, and the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi did not have jurisdiction to award damages under the Georgia Workmen's Compensation Act in an original...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP