Benjamin L. Little v. Gene Robinson.
72 So. 3d 1168
Ala.2011Background
- Little sues Robinson in Calhoun Circuit Court for assault and the tort of outrage.
- Allegations: Anniston City Council race tensions with Robinson (Caucasian mayor) voting with other Caucasians against Little, an African-American council member.
- Alleged confrontation at City Hall included a heated exchange and threats, including a remark about a funeral.
- Little claims Robinson’s public threats caused fear, ridicule, and mental distress; alleges a later broadcast about black corruption and hate speech.
- Little also alleges Robinson attended a League of the South meeting and regularly engaged in hate speech against African Americans.
- Robinson moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6); the trial court dismissed the outrage claim with prejudice; appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the complaint state a valid tort of outrage claim? | Little asserts outrage exists under limited but applicable standards. | Robinson argues the conduct is not extreme/outrageous to meet the standard. | No; claim dismissed for failure to plead extreme/outrageous conduct. |
| Is the tort of outrage in Alabama strictly limited to certain contexts or broadly viable? | Outrage is not so limited as to preclude Littles’ allegations. | Outrage is extremely limited and requires extreme, outrageous conduct. | Remains limited; not satisfied here. |
| Do the specific alleged statements (funeral remark, hate speech, corruption comments) meet the standard? | Taken as true, these could be extreme and outrageous. | These comments do not constitute extreme/outrageous conduct; contextualized as non-imminent threats. | Individually and cumulatively, they do not meet the standard. |
Key Cases Cited
- American Road Service Co. v. Inmon, 394 So.2d 361 (Ala. 1980) (outlines extreme and outrageous conduct required for emotional distress)
- Potts v. Hayes, 771 So.2d 462 (Ala. 2000) (limits the tort of outrage to exceptional circumstances)
- Green Tree Acceptance, Inc. v. Standridge, 565 So.2d 38 (Ala. 1990) (reiterates the extreme and severe distress standard)
- Nance v. Matthews, 622 So.2d 297 (Ala. 1993) (treats outrage as a narrowly defined cause of action)
- McDole v. Alfa Mut. Ins. Co., 875 So.2d 279 (Ala. 2003) (further discussion of the outrage standard and scope)