Dunlop Tire Corp. v. Chunn
Dunlop Tire Corp. v. Chunn
686 So. 2d 203; 1996 Ala. LEXIS 729; 1996 WL 676180
(Southern Reporter, Second Series)
Dunlop Tire Corp. v. Chunn
Opinion of the Court
AVRIT DENIED; NO OPINION.
Dissenting Opinion
(dissenting).
I understand that precedent supports the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals. However, I believe that this Court’s rulings have caused the evidentiary standard governing proof of legal and medical causation in workers’ compensation cases to become so lax that this Court is not applying the statutory standard prescribed by the legislature. I, therefore, respectfully dissent.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.