 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Mississippi Power & Light Co. v. Cook12/5/2002
1997). This Court will consider the evidence in light most favorable to the appellee, giving the appellee the benefit of all favorable inferences that may be reasonably drawn from the evidence. General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Baymon, 732 So. 2d 262, 268 (Miss. 1999) (citing Steele, 697 So. 2d at 376). If the facts are so overwhelmingly in favor of the appellant that reasonable jurors could not have arrived at a contrary verdict, this Court must reverse and render. Id. On the other hand, if there is substantial evidence in support of the verdict, that is, evidence of such quality and weight that reasonable and fair minded jurors in the exercise of impartial judgment might have reached different conclusions, this Court must affirm. Id.
. The standard of review regarding attorneys' fees is the abuse of discretion standard. "The fixing of reasonable attorneys' fees is a matter ordinarily within the sound discretion of the trial court...." Gilchrist Tractor Co. v. Stribling, 192 So. 2d 409, 418 (Miss. 1966). This Court has held:
It is well settled in this State that what constitutes a reasonable attorney's fee rests within the sound discretion of the trial court and any testimony by attorneys with respect to such fees is purely advisory and not binding on the trial court. We will not reverse the trial court on the question of attorney's fees unless there is a manifest abuse of discretion in making the allowance.... Mauck v. Columbus Hotel Co., 741 So. 2d 259, 269 (Miss. 1999).
DISCUSSION
I. WHETHER PLAINTIFF COOK WAS ENTITLED TO MAINTAIN THIS ACTION FOR BAD FAITH REFUSAL TO PAY COMPENSATION BENEFITS CONSISTENT WITH THE DOCTRINE OF EXCLUSIVE ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION WITHOUT HAVING FIRST SECURED RULINGS FROM THE MISSISSIPPI WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION THAT HE WAS ENTITLED TO FURTHER BENEFITS, OR THAT MP&L;HAD VIOLATED SOME DUTY TO COOK UNDER THE MISSISSIPPI WORKERS' COMPENSATION LAW.
. Miss. Code Ann. ยง 71-3-9 (2000) provides that liability of an employer to pay compensation shall be exclusive and in place of all other liability of such employer to the employee. While MP&L;correctly states that the Mississippi Workers' Compensation Law is the exclusive remedy provision for workers' compensation, the independent tort of bad faith refusal to pay compensation is an exception to this provision. See S. Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co. v. Holland, 469 So. 2d 55, 59 (Miss. 1984); Luckett v. Miss. Wood, Inc., 481 So. 2d 288, 290 (Miss. 1985); McCain v. Northwestern Nat'l Ins. Co., 484 So. 2d 1001, 1002 (Miss. 1986); Leathers v. Aetna Cas. & Surety Co., 500 So. 2d 451, 453 (Miss. 1986). All of these cases "recognized exceptions to the exclusivity of the Act but only when based on tortious conduct subsequent to the work place injury ." Peaster v. David New Drilling Co., 642 So. 2d 344, 348 (Miss. 1994). Just as in the case sub judice, these cases involved bad faith refusal to pay benefits.
. In order to prevail in a claim for damages for bad faith there must be a determination as to whether there was a legitimate or arguable reason to deny the benefits, Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Steele, 373 So. 2d 797, 801 (Miss. 1979), and/or that the denial constituted a willful or malicious wrong in disregard for his rights. Weems v. American Sec. Ins. Co., 486 So. 2d 1222, 1226-27 (Miss. 1986). Really the only test set out in Miller v. McRae's, Inc., 444 So. 2d 368 (Miss. 1984), is whether the injury is compensable under the act. The two prongs of the test are not separate requirements, but rather part of the inquiry into whether the injury is compensable. Furthermore, where there is a legitimate or arguable basis in the delay or denial of paym
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Mississippi Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|