Code of Alabama

Ala. Code § 6-5-549.1 (2026)

Limits of Liability Insurance Coverage in Legal Action Against Health Care Providers; Testimony of Health Care Providers as Specialists.

✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaAla. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) This section and Sections 6-5-548 and 6-5-549 shall be known and may be cited as The Alabama Medical Liability Act of 1996.

(b) The Legislature of the State of Alabama finds and declares that a crisis continues to threaten the delivery and availability of medical services to the people of Alabama and the health and safety of the citizens of this state are in jeopardy as a result of this crisis. In accordance with the previous declarations of the Legislature of Alabama in Sections 6-5-480 to 6-5-488, inclusive, 27-26-1 to 27-26-4, inclusive, 27-26-20 to 27-26-43, inclusive, and Sections 6-5-540 to 6-5-552, inclusive, it is the declared intent of this Legislature to ensure that quality medical services continue to be available at reasonable costs to the citizens of the State of Alabama. The continuing and ever increasing threat of legal actions for alleged medical injury causes and contributes to an increase in health care costs and places a heavy burden on those who can least afford such increases. The threat of such actions contributes to the performance of expensive medical procedures by physicians and other health care providers which otherwise would not be considered necessary. The spiraling cost and decreasing availability of essential medical services caused by the threat of litigation constitutes a danger to the health and safety of the citizens of this state. This section and Sections 6-5-548 and 6-5-549 should be given effect immediately to help control the spiraling cost of health care and to ensure its continuing availability. Additionally, the increasing threat of legal actions for alleged medical injury has resulted in a continuing limitation on the number of physicians providing specialized health care in this state. Because of the limited number of insurers offering professional liability coverage and because of the prejudice to the rights of defendant health care providers through the interjection of evidence of insurance, the interest of all citizens will best be served by prohibiting the introduction of evidence that a witness testifying at trial is insured by the same insurer as the defendant health care provider.

(c) For the purposes of this section and Sections 6-5-548 and 6-5-549, the terms used shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them in Section 6-5-542. Notwithstanding the foregoing, for purposes of this section and Sections 6-5-548 and 6-5-549, the term “health care provider” shall include any licensed optometrist or licensed chiropractor and the term “professional corporation” shall include any optometric or chiropractic professional corporation or optometric or chiropractic professional association; and, for purposes of this section and Sections 6-5-548(a) and 6-5-549, the term “health care provider” shall include any licensed podiatrist and the term “professional corporation” shall include any podiatric professional corporation or podiatric professional association; and for purposes of this section and Sections 6-5-548 and 6-5-549, the term “health care provider” shall include emergency medical services personnel and any provider service as those terms are defined in Section 22-18-1. However, subsection (e) does not apply to licensed optometrists and optometric professional corporations or licensed chiropractors and chiropractic professional associations.

(d) This section and Sections 6-5-548 and 6-5-549 are intended to supplement “The Alabama Medical Liability Act,” Act 513, 1975 Regular Session and “The Alabama Medical Liability Act of 1987,” Act 87-189, 1987 Regular Session and the legislative intent stated therein.

(e) This section and Sections 6-5-548 and 6-5-549 apply to all actions pending against health care providers at the time of the effective date of the sections. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this section shall not apply to an action filed against a podiatrist prior to March 7, 2006.

(Acts 1996, No. 96-511, p. 650, §§1, 2, 4-6; Act 2006-191, p. 269, §1; Act 2023-103, §1.)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 11 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1997–2024 · leading case: Johnson v. Price, 743 So. 2d 436 (Ala. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Johnson v. Price, 743 So. 2d 436 (Ala. 1999). · cites it 4× “1(e) clearly states: "[Section 6-5-549.1] and Sections 6-5-548 and 6-5-549 apply to all actions pending against health care providers at the time of the effective date of the sections.”

Taylor v. Smith, 892 So. 2d 887 (Ala. 2004). · cites it 2× “" See § 6-5-540 (purpose of the Act is to regulate actions for "alleged medical injury") (emphasis added); see also Ala.Code 1975, § 6-5-549.1 (same). Because the Taylors are seeking recovery for damages and injuries arising out of an automobile accident, not "medical injuries,"…”

Mashner v. Pennington, 729 So. 2d 262 (Ala. 1998). · cites it 4× “See, generally, § 6-5-549.1, Ala.Code 1975. Section § 6-5-549.”

Avnet v. Altapointe Health Sys., Inc. (Ex parte Altapointe Health Sys., Inc.), 249 So. 3d 1108 (Ala. 2017). · cites it 2× “1984) ]. By definition, a "medical-malpractice action" is one for redress of a "medical injury.”

Cackowski v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 767 So. 2d 319 (Ala. 2000). “[3] We note that § 6-5-549.1, Ala.Code 1975, enacted after this Court had decided Baker , supplemented the AMLA to include licensed chiropractors within the definition of "health care providers.”

McNamara v. Benchmark Ins. Co., 261 So. 3d 213 (Ala. 2017). · cites it 2× “' See § 6-5-540 (purpose of the Act is to regulate actions for 'alleged medical injury') (emphasis added); see also Ala. Code 1975, § 6-5-549.1 (same). Because the [plaintiff was] seeking recovery for damages and injuries arising out of an automobile accident, not 'medical…”

Hayes Ex Rel. Est. of Billarreal v. Luckey, 33 F. Supp. 2d 987 (N.D. Ala. 1997). · cites it 2× “” Ala.Code § 6-5-549.1(e). 12 .The observations of Judge Acker in Gallups and the Fourth Circuit in Laws are bolstered by the procedures utilized by this court when considering appeals from Administrative Law Judges.”

Knapp v. Wilkins, 786 So. 2d 457 (Ala. 2000). “) Our case of Mashner v. Pennington, 729 So.2d 262 (Ala.”

Ex parte Tombigbee Healthcare Auth., 260 So. 3d 1 (2017). “" (emphasis added)); Ala. Code 1975, § 6-5-549.1(b) ("[I]t is the declared intent of this Legislature to ensure that quality medical services continue to be available at reasonable costs to the citizens of the State of *12 Alabama.”

Donald J. Mottern, as Adm'r of the Est. of Lavonne S. Mottern v. Baptist Health Sys., Inc., d/b/a BMC - Princeton Med. Ctr. (Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court: CV-11-901140). (Ala. 2024). · cites it 2× “The AMLA was supplemented again by the Alabama Medical Liability Act of 1996 ("the 1996 Act"), which amended certain provisions of the 1987 Act and added § 6-5-549.1, Ala. Code 1975. In the 1987 Act, the Legislature expressly recognized an "increasing threat of legal actions for…”

— Ala. Code § 6-5-549.1(b) — 1 case

— Ala. Code § 6-5-549.1(c) — 2 cases

Knapp v. Wilkins, 786 So. 2d 457 (Ala. 2000). “) Our case of Mashner v. Pennington, 729 So.2d 262 (Ala.”

Mashner v. Pennington, 729 So. 2d 262 (Ala. 1998). “See, generally, § 6-5-549.1, Ala.Code 1975. Section § 6-5-549.”

— Ala. Code § 6-5-549.1(d) — 1 case

Mashner v. Pennington, 729 So. 2d 262 (Ala. 1998). “See, generally, § 6-5-549.1, Ala.Code 1975. Section § 6-5-549.”

— Ala. Code § 6-5-549.1(e) — 2 cases

Johnson v. Price, 743 So. 2d 436 (Ala. 1999). “1(e) clearly states: "[Section 6-5-549.1] and Sections 6-5-548 and 6-5-549 apply to all actions pending against health care providers at the time of the effective date of the sections.”

Hayes Ex Rel. Est. of Billarreal v. Luckey, 33 F. Supp. 2d 987 (N.D. Ala. 1997). “” Ala.Code § 6-5-549.1(e). 12 .The observations of Judge Acker in Gallups and the Fourth Circuit in Laws are bolstered by the procedures utilized by this court when considering appeals from Administrative Law Judges.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.