Davis v. Pioneer Inc., et al.
| Docket Number: | 2001-CA-00045-COA Linked Case(s): 2001-CA-00045-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 01-14-2003 Opinion Author: Thomas, J. Holding: Reversed and Remanded |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Personal injury - Exclusivity of Workers’ Compensation Act - Intentional acts Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Lee, Irving, Myers and Chandler, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Griffis, J. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 01-02-2001 Appealed from: Lauderdale County Circuit Court Judge: Larry Eugene Roberts Disposition: SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF Case Number: 98-CV-173(R) |
|
| Note: | The original opinion issued by this court is withdrawn and this opinion substituted therefor. | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Robert Davis and Teresa Davis |
JOHN GRIFFIN JONES
JAY BOLING
|
||
| Appellee: | Pioneer Inc. and Vincent Oye | CLIFFORD B. AMMONS THOMAS Y. PAGE WALTER JAMES BRAND AMY C. FELDER JAMES HOWARD THIGPEN |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Personal injury - Exclusivity of Workers’ Compensation Act - Intentional acts |
| Summary of the Facts: | The motion for rehearing is denied, and this opinion is substituted for the original opinion. Robert Davis and Vincent Oye, both employees of Pioneer, Inc., disagreed about a matter at work which resulted in a physical assault on Davis by Oye. Robert and Teresa Davis filed a personal injury action against Pioneer and Oye, asserting claims for assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and loss of consortium. The court granted a motion for summary judgment in favor of Pioneer and Oye. The Davises appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | The Davises argue that the court erred by holding that they were barred from maintaining the tort action by virtue of the exclusivity provision of the Mississippi Workers' Compensation Act, because there is nothing in the Act that would make recovery for intentional torts and compensation benefits mutually exclusive. This case is governed by Blailock v. O'Bannon, 795 So. 2d 533 (Miss. 2001), in which the Supreme Court held that allegations of intentional acts take the plaintiff’s non compensable claims out of the jurisdiction of the Act. Even though Davis has received workers' compensation medical benefits, he is not precluded compensation for damages that are not compensable under the Act because they are alleged to have been caused by wilful and intentional acts. The damages resulting from the assault and battery are not compensable under the Act because they stem from a wilful and intentional act, not a negligent or grossly negligent act. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
