Carter-Shepherd v. Royal Furniture Co. and State of Alabama, [Ms. CL-2025-0272, Nov. 7, 2025] __ So. 3d __ (Ala. Civ. App. 2025). The court (Fridy, J.; Edwards, Hanson and Bowden, JJ., concur; Moore, P.J., recuses) affirms the Jefferson Circuit Court’s judgment denying Tracia Carter-Shepherd’s (“the employee”) constitutional challenge to the provision of the Alabama Workers’ Compensation Act at Ala. Code 1975, § 25-5-90(a) limiting attorney’s fees to 15% of the compensation awarded or paid.
The court reiterates that “acts of the legislature are presumed constitutional. ... and [the] Court will sustain the act unless it is clear beyond reasonable doubt that the act violates the constitution.” Ms. *5, internal citations and quotation marks omitted.
In rejecting the employee’s separation-of-powers challenge the court holds, “[l]ike in Seitzinger [v. Commonwealth, 25 A.3d 1299, 1304-06 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2011)], in the present case, the employee does not present any argument indicating that § 25-5-90, as applied, operates in a manner that impinges upon the judiciary’s right to regulate attorney’s fees. Moreover, our supreme court has acknowledged the legislature’s right, under its police power, to regulate attorney’s fees pursuant to the Act.” Ms. *21. “The limitation on attorney’s fees in § 25-5-90 amounts to a valid exercise of the legislature’s police power that is consistent with the judiciary’s authority to make and promulgate rules governing the administration, practice, and procedure in all courts.” Ms. *25.