Teasley v. Freeman

The exclusive remedy provision of the Workers' Compensation Act barred the plaintiff's suit, arising after an escaped Fulton county prisoner shot and killed her husband, who was a sergeant in the county sheriff's office.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

After her husband, Sergeant Hoyt Teasley of the Fulton County Sheriff’s Department, was shot and killed by Brian Nichols, Deborah Teasley sued Fulton County Sheriff Myron Freeman; Deputies Chelisa Lee, Gary Reid, Lucious Johnson, Alphonso Wright, Twantta Clerk-Mathis, Jerome Dowdell, Paul Tamer, and Grantley White; the Fulton County’s Sheriff’s Office; the Fulton County Board of Commissioners; and APA Security, Inc.1 The trial court ultimately dismissed the suit on the ground that it was barred by the exclusive remedy provision of the Workers’ Compensation Act. Deborah Teasley filed this appeal contending that the trial court erred by ruling that 1 Sheriff Freeman was Sergeant Teasley’s employer for purposes of the Act, and 2 no unique duty was owed to Sergeant Teasley that rendered inapplicable the Act’s exclusive remedy provision.2 For the reasons that follow, we affirm. The case arises from the events of March 11, 2005, when Brian Nichols escaped from the custody of Fulton County deputies at the Fulton County Courthouse. For the purposes of this appeal, the material facts are undisputed and essentially the same as those summarized in other cases arising from the same events.3 In this case, the injuries allegedly arose when Nichols shot and killed Sergeant Teasley after he pursued Nichols out of the courthouse and engaged Nichols on the street. Deborah Teasley, Sergeant Teasley’s surviving spouse, filed suit on behalf of herself, their minor children, and Sergeant Teasley’s estate, seeking compensatory and punitive damages for wrongful death, emotional distress, and loss of consortium. Following limited discovery and other pretrial rulings by the trial court not challenged here, the plaintiff’s claims were dismissed, giving rise to this appeal.4

Because the dismissal was premised only on the resolution of legal issues, we conduct a de novo review of those issues, construing the complaint’s factual allegations in favor of the plaintiff.5

Teasley v. Freeman

The exclusive remedy provision of the Workers' Compensation Act barred the plaintiff's suit, arising after an escaped Fulton county prisoner shot and killed her husband, who was a sergeant in the county sheriff's office.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report