Reed v. Brookwood Medical Center

Decision Date06 May 1994
Citation641 So.2d 1245
PartiesCharles REED v. BROOKWOOD MEDICAL CENTER. 1930313.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Billy C. Burney of Burney & Burney, Decatur, for appellant.

Michael K. Wright and Sybil Vogtle Abbot of Starnes & Atchinson, Birmingham, for appellee.

INGRAM, Justice.

Charles Reed sued Brookwood Medical Center ("Brookwood"), alleging fraud, outrage, breach of contract, and defamation. Holding that Reed's claims were barred by the doctrines of collateral estoppel and res judicata, the trial court entered a summary judgment for Brookwood. Reed appealed.

On October 10, 1990, while employed at Southern Moving Systems, Inc. ("Southern"), Reed suffered a work-related injury to his back and received medical treatment for it. He contends that in December Southern and its worker's compensation insurance carrier, United States Fidelity & Guaranty ("USF & G"), requested that he undergo a myelogram at Brookwood's medical facility in order to determine if there was any further injury to his back. Reed had not received treatment at Brookwood's facility for his back injury before December 27, 1990, when he was admitted to undergo the myelogram. Upon admission to Brookwood's facility, Reed signed a financial agreement, stating that he agreed to be personally liable for the cost of all medical treatment. Reed was discharged on December 28. The myelogram appears to have been the only medical procedure performed.

In April 1991, a final judgment was entered in the worker's compensation case. Later, Reed received a bill from Brookwood for his December 1990 treatment. In September 1992, with the bill still unpaid, Brookwood sued Reed in the Morgan District Court to collect it. On October 29, 1992, the district court entered a $3,835 judgment for Brookwood. Reed did not appeal.

Reed brought the present action alleging fraud, breach of contract, outrage, and defamation, on April 22, 1993, in the Circuit Court of Morgan County. These claims were based on the contention that Brookwood had wrongfully sued him in the Morgan District Court to collect its bill. Reed alleged that he was not liable to Brookwood for the cost of the treatment and that Brookwood had defamed him by printing the wrong diagnosis on his bill. The trial judge entered a summary judgment for Brookwood on December 6, 1993, holding that Reed's action was barred by the doctrines of collateral estoppel and res judicata. It is important to note that any claim Reed may have against Southern or USF & G for reimbursement of his medical expenses is not involved in this case.

The doctrine of collateral estoppel precludes one party from raising against another party a claim previously litigated between the same parties in an earlier action. McDonald v. U.S. Die Casting & Development Co., 628 So.2d 433 (Ala.1993); Whisman v. Alabama Power Co., 512 So.2d 78 (Ala.1987). The issue in Brookwood's collection action in the district court was whether Reed was liable to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Equity Resources Management, Inc. v. Vinson
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • November 13, 1998
    ...& Supply Co. v. Peoples Bank & Trust Co., 598 So.2d 844 (Ala.1992); Vaughan v. Barr, 600 So.2d 994 (Ala.1992); Reed v. Brookwood Medical Center, 641 So.2d 1245 (Ala.1994); Benetton S.p.A. v. Benedot, Inc., 642 So.2d 394 (Ala.1994); see also other cases collected at 34 Ala. Digest 2d Judgmen......
  • Hawkins v. Thompson
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Alabama
    • February 16, 2022
    ... ... Kizzire, 441 ... F.3d at 1309 (citing Reed v. Brookwood Med. Ctr. , ... 641 So.2d 1245, 1246 (Ala. 1994)) ... ...
  • Lloyd Noland Foundation v. Healthsouth
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • August 24, 2007
    ...and (4) the same parties are involved in the two actions. Smith v. Union Bank & Trust, 653 So.2d 933 (Ala.1995); Reed v. Brookwood Med. Ctr., 641 So.2d 1245 (Ala. 1994). The doctrine of collateral estoppel is not applicable in the present case. The order in the federal litigation granting H......
  • Kizzire v. Baptist Health Systems, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Alabama
    • October 21, 2004
    ...The failure to assert those claims means they are now barred. In reaching this conclusion, the Court is bound by the holding in Reed v. Brookwood Medical Center. In that case, Reed went to Brookwood Medical Center for treatment. Reed v. Brookwood Med. Ctr., 641 So.2d 1245, 1246 (Ala.1994). ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT