Whatley v. Cardinal Pest Control
Decision Date | 19 September 1980 |
Citation | 388 So.2d 529 |
Parties | Timothy G. WHATLEY v. CARDINAL PEST CONTROL. 79-198. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Ruben K. King, Montgomery, for appellant.
H. E. Nix, Jr. of Hill, Hill, Carter, Franco, Cole & Black, Montgomery, for appellee.
Timothy G. Whatley challenges the trial court's grant of the defendant's motion for summary judgment in a suit claiming personal injuries in consequence of Cardinal Pest Control's negligent application of a pesticide chemical compound known as "Purge."
We begin our review by reaffirming the general proposition-too well settled to require citation of authority-that rarely is summary judgment appropriate in a claim based upon negligence. Stated another way, this Court is firmly committed to a rule of extreme caution in its review of a summary judgment granted in a tort claim context. But not even the application of this rule can spare the plaintiff from the fate of summary judgment where, after opportunity for full discovery, the evidence, when viewed most favorably to the plaintiff under the scintilla rule, fails to raise a reasonable inference that the alleged negligence was the proximate cause of the injury complained of.
The evidence in the instant case, which is essentially undisputed, is summarized in appellant's brief:
"The Appellant presented evidence that the condition or injury for which he sought recovery did not exist prior to the negligence of the Appellee; that the condition started immediately after exposure to the chemicals; that the chemicals used by Appellee was (sic) poisonous when inhaled or absorbed through the skin or eyes; that Appellant inhaled the chemicals while working; that Appellee used an excessive amount of the chemical compound 'Purge;' that the cause of Appellant's condition was diagnosed as 'unknown' in June, 1977; that traces of the chemicals would not be present in blood after the lapse of five months; and that (3) other individuals suffered similar symptoms at the same time and place."
Plaintiff/appellant's persuasive argument is summarized in the following two paragraphs of his brief:
Our focus on the dispositive question-whether the evidence raises a genuine issue of material fact-is sharpened by the following extracts from defendant/appellee's brief in reply to appellant's contentions:
Under Rule 56 of the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure, summary judgment is appropriate only when the moving party has demonstrated, by the pleadings, answers to interrogatories, depositions and affidavits, that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the movant is entitled to the requested relief as a matter of law....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Ex parte General Motors Corp.
...of evidence negating the claim or affirmative defense in summary-judgment proceedings. Lawson State, supra, cites Whatley v. Cardinal Pest Control, 388 So.2d 529 (Ala. 1980), and Real Coal, Inc. v. Thompson Tractor Co., 379 So.2d 1249 (Ala.1980), as cited by still other cases, for the propo......
-
Home Bank of Guntersville v. Perpetual Federal Sav. and Loan Ass'n
...there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a a matter of law.' Whatley v. Cardinal Pest Control, 388 So.2d 529 (Ala.1980); Wheeler v. First Alabama Bank of Birmingham, 364 So.2d 1190 (Ala.1978); Rule 56, ARCP. 'If there is a scintilla of evi......
-
Lawson State Community College v. First Continental Leasing Corp.
...when there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. Whatley v. Cardinal Pest Control, 388 So.2d 529 (Ala.1980); Wheeler v. First Alabama Bank of Birmingham, 364 So.2d 1190 (Ala.1978); Rule 56, ARCP. "If there is a scintilla of e......
-
Jehle-Slauson Const. Co. v. Hood-Rich Architects and Consulting Engineers
...when there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. Whatley v. Cardinal Pest Control, 388 So.2d 529 (Ala.1980); Wheeler v. First Alabama Bank of Birmingham, 364 So.2d 1190 (Ala.1978); Rule 56, ARCP. "If there is a scintilla of e......