Fierro v. Crom Corp.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Fierro v. Crom Corp.

617 So. 2d 379, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4234, 1993 WL 114762

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 16, 1993

DocketNo. 92-03073

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 617 So. 2d 379 (Fierro v. Crom Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fierro v. Crom Corp., 617 So. 2d 379, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4234, 1993 WL 114762 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

CAMPBELL, Judge.

This is an appeal from a summary judgment entered for appellee, an employer who was the defendant in a tort action, based upon the employer’s alleged vicarious liability for its employee’s alleged negligence in a motor vehicle accident injuring a third party, appellant, Melanie Fierro. The accident occurred while the employee was voluntarily transporting other employees in a privately owned vehicle between the employees’ place of work and their temporary residence while working for the employer away from their normal place of residence.

Appellant urges us to apply the “traveling employee” exception followed in Leonard v. Dennis, 465 So.2d 538 (Fla. 2d [380]*380DCA), rev. denied, 476 So.2d 673 (Fla.1985). Leonard, however, applies that exception only in workers’ compensation cases in regard to torts arising out of incidents occurring when an employee is away from home. We decline to extend that exception provided in workers’ compensation cases for the “traveling employee” to permit an action against an employer for his traveling employee’s negligence resulting in injuries to third parties. We choose instead to follow the reasoning of Sussman v. Florida East Coast Properties, Inc., 557 So.2d 74 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 574 So.2d 143 (Fla.1990). We, therefore, affirm the summary judgment entered below.

RYDER and PARKER, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

CAMPBELL, Judge.

This is an appeal from a summary judgment entered for appellee, an employer who was the defendant in a tort action, based upon the employer’s alleged vicarious liability for its employee’s alleged negligence in a motor vehicle accident injuring a third party, appellant, Melanie Fierro. The accident occurred while the employee was voluntarily transporting other employees in a privately owned vehicle between the employees’ place of work and their temporary residence while working for the employer away from their normal place of residence.

Appellant urges us to apply the “traveling employee” exception followed in Leonard v. Dennis, 465 So.2d 538 (Fla. 2d [380]*380DCA), rev. denied, 476 So.2d 673 (Fla.1985). Leonard, however, applies that exception only in workers’ compensation cases in regard to torts arising out of incidents occurring when an employee is away from home. We decline to extend that exception provided in workers’ compensation cases for the “traveling employee” to permit an action against an employer for his traveling employee’s negligence resulting in injuries to third parties. We choose instead to follow the reasoning of Sussman v. Florida East Coast Properties, Inc., 557 So.2d 74 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 574 So.2d 143 (Fla.1990). We, therefore, affirm the summary judgment entered below.

RYDER and PARKER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

617 So. 2d 379, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4234, 1993 WL 114762, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fierro-v-crom-corp-fladistctapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack