Robinson v. F. Strauss & Son, Inc.

• Decision Date: 13 January 1986
• Docket Number: No. 85-C-0802,85-C-0802
• Citation: Robinson v. F. Strauss & Son, Inc., 481 So.2d 592 (La. 1986)
• Parties: Curtis ROBINSON v. F. STRAUSS & SON, INC. 481 So.2d 592
• Court: Louisiana Supreme Court

Page 592

481 So.2d 592

Curtis ROBINSON v.F. STRAUSS & SON, INC.

No. 85-C-0802.

481 So.2d 592

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 13, 1986.

Girard J. Fernandez, New Orleans, for plaintiff-applicant.

Paul G. Preston, Christovich & Kearney, New Orleans, for defendant-respondent.

DENNIS, Justice.

We granted certiorari because it appeared that the decisions below to deny an employee worker's compensation may have been based on an error of law, viz., that an accident which happens when a truck driver deviates from his prescribed route to pick up his driver's license at home in violation of a company work rule cannot, as a matter of law, arise out of and in the course of his employment.Upon careful review of the record, however, we discovered that the trial court's judgment was based both on this error of law and an independent factual finding that the employee's accident occurred while he was on a personal mission arising out of an amorous relationship and not during a detour to retrieve his driver's license.Accordingly, we affirm on the basis of the factual finding, for which there is warrant in the record, while disapproving the previous courts' erroneous statement of law.

Plaintiff, Curtis Robinson, worked for F. Strauss & Son, Inc., a liquor distributor, as a delivery truck driver.On November 5, 1981 Robinson was assigned to make liquor deliveries in the uptown area of New Orleans where he lived.While making his rounds Robinson stopped near his house on two occasions.The first time, at about 12:00 p.m., he stopped, got out, returned to his truck, and resumed deliveries without incident.But the second time, at about 6:30 p.m., as Robinson approached the area near his house on foot he was wounded by a shotgun blast fired by one of his neighbors.Robinson's injuries resulted in the amputation of one of his legs.

An employee protected by the Louisiana statute is entitled to receive worker's compensation if disabled 'by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.'LSA-R.S. 23:1031.Lisonbee v. Chicago Mill and Lumber Company, 278 So.2d 5(La.1973).In Kern v. Southport Mill, 174 La. 432, 141 So. 19, 21(1932), this court stated that, for purposes of the worker's compensation act, (a)"an accident occurs in the course of an employment when it takes place during the time of such employment", and (b) it arises out of the employment when it is "the result of some risk to which the employee is subjected in the course of his employment to which he would not have been subjected had he not been so employed."

Our courts have repeatedly awarded compensation for injuries sustained by employees while away from the place of employment attending to personal needs which are incidental to the employment or which enable the employee to work better.Lisonbee v. Chicago Mill and Lumber Company, supra at 11(Tate, J., dissenting).See e.g.: Gray v. Broadway, 146 So.2d 282(La.App.2d Cir.1962)(truckdriver went home to get driver's license);Alexander v. Insurance Co. of Pa., 131 So.2d 558(La.App.3d Cir.1961)(worker went home to pick up workboots);St. Alexandre v. Texas Co., 28 So.2d 385(La.App.Orl.1946), certiorari denied (employee left plant to obtain soft drink at stand a short distance away);Rigsby v. John W. Clark Co., 28 So.2d 346(La.App.1st Cir.1946), certiorari denied (bookkeeper injured when he left work premises to fix hanging charged wire which created danger to others);Clark v. Employers Liability Assur. Corp., 27 So.2d 464(La.App.1st Cir.1946)(employee injured on way to cafe to eat during workhours, where no eating facilities on premises.)The courts have consistently held that an employee is protected during work hours, despite minor deviations from instructions or place of work, if what he does could reasonably be contemplated as humanly incidental to his service as an employee and does not unreasonably increase the risk of injury.SeeMalone & Johnson, Louisiana Workmen's Compensation Law and Practice, 13 La.Civ.Law Treat., Sections 163-165(1980).

In the...