Legal Opinion · Dissent

Gober v. Alabama Department of Corrections

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama

Decided March 14, 2003No. 2020064Published

1DissentMurdock, Judge

I read § 25-5-86(2), Ala.Code 1975, to be plainly worded and straightforward. Compensation benefits payable under the *843Workers’ Compensation Act “shall not be assignable and shall be exempt from seizure ... for the payment of any debt or liability.”

The Department of Corrections argues, however, that the payments at issue are not compensation benefits under the Workers’ Compensation Act. The majority relies primarily upon Lanford v. City of Sheffield, 689 So.2d 176 (Ala.Civ.App. 1997). I find that case distinguishable.

In Lanford, the claimant was serving a jail sentence for the commission of a…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. IMED Corp. v. Systems Engineering Assoc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1992
  2. Gaut v. MedranoSupreme Court of Alabama · 1993
  3. Keeney v. Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1975
  4. Porter v. Department of CorrectionsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1994
  5. Lanford v. City of SheffieldCourt of Civil Appeals of Alabama · 1997

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API