A Jefferson County judge's ruling on a workman's compensation case found that Alabama's system would be unconstitutional -- a move that lawyers see as a call for state lawmakers to look for legislative reform.

Jefferson County Circuit Judge Pat Ballard's ruling found two statutes unconstitutional: One capping recovery for workers that are permanently, but not totally disabled at $220 per week, and one that caps attorney fees at 15 percent.

Attorney's Lawrence King of King Simmons of Birmingham and Don Rhea of Gadsden's Rhea, Boyd & Rhea, "led the attack on the law" according to a press release from the firms.

Rhea said the ruling could have far-reaching implications. A non-severability statute in the Alabama Workmans Compensation Act, if any part of the law is deemed unconstitutional, the entire act is unconstitutional.

It's hoped that the ruling will lead lawmakers to rework the act and "bring it into the 21st," Rhea said.

The law setting the cap has been on the books since 1987 and applies to all permanently disabled workers that earn more than $330 per week -- if they still are able to locate, be hired for and maintain any gainful employment.

Under the current law, a worker hurt on the job able to return to some form of work after his or her condition stablizes is eligible for a "capped" amount of $220 per week to compensate for the effects of the residual permanent disability, the release states.

If a company executive paid $150,000 per year is catastrophically injured in a car wreck while visiting clients but still able to find some bit of employment qualifying as "gainful" after his recovery plateaus, he would receive a maximum of $220 per week for just over five years to compensate him for life-changing injuries, the release states.

"Judge Ballard has turned the lights onto a horrible inequity that has penalized injured members of Alabama's labor force for decades," Rhea said, "and I really am encouraged that his clarion call for change will finally be heard.

"This is a brave ruling based on simple fairness, not partisan politics, and Judge Ballard had the courage to speak truth to the powerful interests involved, calling for work to get done so that injured taxpayers are met with common decency as they suffer through the misfortune of accidents in the workplace."

The lawsuit was brought by a woman against CVS Caremark Corp. in 2013 after she suffered a lower back injury on the job.

Evidence presented to the judge showed that $220 per week was above the minimum wage level for a 40-hour week in 1987, and was above the poverty level for a family of four. That $220 limitation today is a fraction of minimum wage for a 40-hour work week and below the poverty level for a family of four.

If adjusted for inflation, evidence showed, that $220 cap today would equal just under $500.

King said the lawsuit challenged the cap on lawyers' fees because the system was set up to keep injured workers from getting easy access to legal help. With the cap on benefits and the cap on fees set at 15 percent, handling workers' compensation cases has become economically unfeasible for many lawyers, he said -- one of the lowest rates in the entire country.

Without adequate access to legal assistance, the 15,000 to 20,000 Alabamians that suffer on-the-job injuries each year would be left to the whims of the insurance industry in many instances, King said.

"For far too long, benefits have simply remains stagnant at that $220 level," Rhea said. "We realize that the stakes are high, but Judge Ballard showed a lot of courage in recognizing what has become a gross inequality that the Legislature has elected not to address, and did what the law required of him.

"We are very optimistic that reasonable-minded people can work across the aisles and do what is right and fair," Rhea said.