MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Court has before it the Motion of The Travelers Insurance Company to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, to Stay Proceedings in this action for bad-faith refusal to pay workers’ compensation insurance benefits. The Court holds first that the action was properly removed to federal court. The Court holds next that the bad-faith claim may not proceed before the validity of the underlying compensation claim has been established by administrative adjudication. Since the underlying claim is now before the Mississippi Workers’ Compensation Commission (the Commission), the Court will stay proceedings in this action pending final resolution of that claim.
James Lamar Powers brought this action in the Circuit Court of Hinds County, Mississippi, on July 2, 1986. Travelers removed the action to this Court under diversity jurisdiction. Powers alleges that Travelers refused in bad faith to compensate him sufficiently for at-home nursing services during various periods between 1980 and 1985 when he was recuperating from an industrial injury. Powers asserts that he was entitled to nursing care seven, instead of five, days a week. He requests back payment for the omitted weekends, an amount alleged to be $8,220.00, plus general compensatory damages of $1,000,000.00, and punitive damages of $3,000,000.00. Powers has not sought an administrative adjudication of his claim before the Commission and pleads no reason for his failure to do so. After he filed his bad faith action, however, Travelers brought a motion to controvert the claim before the Commission. That motion is still pending.
The Mississippi Supreme Court only recently concluded that workers may bring actions in court for the bad-faith refusal to pay workers’ compensation benefits.
Southern Farm Casualty Insurance Co. v. Holland,
... the exclusivity provision of the Workers’ Compensation Act does not bar an action by the employee against the insurance carrier for the commission of an intentional tort [bad-faith refusal to pay]. The independent tort is not compensable under our Workers’ Compensation Act and to extend immunity to compensation *254 carriers for a separate injury to workers goes far beyond the intent of the act.
Holland,
I.
The Court considers Powers’ argument for remand in the context of these cases. Although he has not filed a motion to remand, Powers argues that if this Court accepts Travelers’ motion, then the Court must remand the action to state court under 28 U.S.C. § 1445(c). Section 1445(c) states that actions “arising under the workmen’s compensation laws” of a state may not be removed to a district court of that state. The Mississippi Supreme Court, however, recognized bad-faith actions against workers' compensation insurers specifically to address a civil wrong “not compensable under our Workers’ Compensation Act____”
Holland,
II.
Travelers’ Motion to Dismiss or to Stay presents the question whether a worker may bring an action for bad-faith refusal to pay workers’ compensation benefits without first having been adjudged entitled to benefits by a final administrative decision of the Workers' Compensation Commission, in which is vested exclusive jurisdiction of claims for benefits.
Miss. Code Ann.
§ 71-3-47 (1972);
Everitt v. Lovitt,
In
Luckett,
however, the court found the complaint sufficient to state a claim, against both the employer and the carrier, without stating whether Luckett had won his administrative claim.
In
McCain,
too, the court found the complaint sufficient without noting any administrative disposition and without considering the effect of the administrative jurisdiction of claims for benefits.
An arguable reason by an insurance company in denying a claim will defeat a claim for punitive damages____ A prerequisite to the award of punitive damages is the determination that the plaintiff is entitled to contractual damages.
Id. (citations omitted).
In
Leathers,
Although the Mississippi Supreme Court has not yet decided the issue, another federal court in this district recently decided that the Mississippi court would not allow a worker to proceed with an action for bad-faith refusal to pay workers’ compensation benefits unless the worker had first exhausted his administrative remedies.
Kitchens v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.,
This Court decides this case on how it believes the Mississippi Supreme Court would rule and accordingly rules that a bad-faith action should not proceed before there is a final adjudication of the underlying compensation claim in accordance with the procedures established for the administration of such claims by the Mississippi Workers’ Compensation Law. The Mississippi Supreme Court has stated that the establishment of the right to compensation is a prerequisite to a claim for punitive damages.
McCain,
Plaintiff argues that this Court’s acceptance of jurisdiction over his bad-faith claim deprives the Workers’ Compensation Commission of jurisdiction over the compensation claim because of the following section of the Workers’ Compensation Law:
No controversy shall be heard by the commission or award of compensation made therein while the same matter is pending either before a federal court or in any court in this state.
Miss. Code Ann.
§ 71-3-51. Powers argues that in conjunction with the
Holland
line of decisions this section deprives the Commission of jurisdiction over the compensation claim which underlies the bad-faith action. Powers argument, however, is simply an attempt to evade the Workers’ Compensation Laws; it is not justified by the
Holland
cases. The Mississippi Supreme Court has recently emphasized that bad-faith damages are reserved for exceptional cases.
Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Day,
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that proceedings in this case be stayed in accordance with this opinion.
