District court summary judgment ruling in Porter v. Southtrust Bank case

¶ … United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama ruled correctly in awarding partial summary judgment in this case. The summary judgment was granted in accordance with Rule 56(c) (3), Ala. R. Civ. P. Under Rule 56(c)(3), "summary judgment is proper when there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law."

"If the moving party makes a prima facie showing that no genuine issue of material fact exists, then the burden shifts to the nonmovant." Bass v. Southtrust Bank, 538 So. 2d 794,798 (Ala. 1989). This burden requires the nonmovant to show "substantial evidence" in support of his position. id at 798.

Porter fails to show substantial proof of exposure to HIV on which his claim of emotional distress is based. Lacking proof of actual HIV exposure the plaintiff cannot move ahead with a claim based on "fear of contracting disease." Porter shows proof of fear of contracting HIV. He shows that his fear caused him to miss work and suffer weight loss (R 4). Porter claims these fears continued even after three separate HIV tests and after he had been reassured that his chances of contracting HIV after one year was negligible by his personal physician (R 18). While he shows his fear he still fails to show "substantial" evidence upon which the fear maybe based. Without "substantial proof" of a material fact on which the claim can be made.

In Grantham v. Vanderzyl, 802 So. 2d 1077, 1081(Ala. 2001), the Alabama supreme court stated "the mere fear of contracting a disease, without actual exposure to it, cannot be sufficient to cause the level of emotional distress necessary for this cause of action." In Grantham, like the case at hand the plaintiff sued over emotional distress related to possible exposure to HIV. Grantham submitted to multiple blood tests that all came back negative id at 1081. There must be a basis in fact for her fear of developing a disease id. Porter like Grantham cannot show a basis in fact that would legitimize his claim for emotional distress.

The District court correctly ruled in granting partial summary judgment with regard to the issue of negligent infliction of emotional distress. Porter fails to show substantial evidence that would justify his claim. Without substantial evidence the ruling for partial summary judgment was proper and should stand.