Standard Distribution Co. v. Johnson

445 So. 2d 663
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedFebruary 21, 1984
DocketAU-119
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 445 So. 2d 663 (Standard Distribution Co. v. Johnson) 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
Standard Distribution Co. v. Johnson, 445 So. 2d 663 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Opinion

445 So.2d 663 (1984)

STANDARD DISTRIBUTION COMPANY and National Fire Insurance Company of Hart, Appellants,
v.
SIDNEY WADE JOHNSON, Appellee.

No. AU-119.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 21, 1984.

*664 John L. Myrick of Kinsey, Myrick & Troxel, Pensacola, for appellants.

Ralph A. Peterson of Beggs & Lane, Pensacola, for appellee.

MILLS, Judge.

The employer/carrier (E/C) appeal from a workers' compensation order awarding Johnson compensation and medical benefits contending the deputy commissioner erred in finding that Johnson was enroute to his home and had not deviated from his employment at the time of an automobile accident resulting in his injury. We affirm.

Johnson was employed as a traveling salesman and was paid by Standard for the use of his car. He did not have to report to Standard's office at the end of the business day. At the time of the accident, he had completed the business day and was enroute to his home. Although he intended to visit a friend before reaching his home, he had not deviated from his usual route home at the time of the accident.

Johnson was a traveling employee who was paid for the use of his car on his employer's business. These are exceptions to the going-and-coming rule, thus, his accident and injury while enroute home were covered by the workers' compensation act. Poinciana Village Const. Corp. v. Gallarano, 424 So.2d 822 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).

Standard argues that intention to deviate from the usual route removes Johnson from application of the exceptions. This argument is without merit. A distinct deviation is required. Sunshine Jr. Food Stores v. Thompson, 409 So.2d 190 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).

Standard also argues that its suggestion of a more practical route removes application of the exceptions. This argument is without merit too when the usual route is used.

There is competent substantial evidence that this accident and the injuries occurred while Johnson was on his usual route home.

AFFIRMED.

WENTWORTH, J., and McCORD, GUYTE P., Jr., (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.

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

Related

Swartz v. McDonald's Corp.
788 So. 2d 937 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2001)
McCormick v. State-Auditor General/Division of Risk Management
772 So. 2d 612 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)
Swartz v. McDonald's Corp.
726 So. 2d 783 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
North American Training Academy v. Grooms
476 So. 2d 753 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
445 So. 2d 663, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/standard-distribution-co-v-johnson-fladistctapp-1984.