Welbro Construction Co. v. Tucker

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Welbro Construction Co. v. Tucker

557 So. 2d 220, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1156, 1990 WL 16885

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 26, 1990

DocketNo. 89-1557

StatusPublished

This text of 557 So. 2d 220 (Welbro Construction Co. v. Tucker) 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

Welbro Construction Co. v. Tucker, 557 So. 2d 220, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1156, 1990 WL 16885 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

WIGGINTON, Judge.

The order of the judge of compensation claims finding claimant’s injury to be com-pensable is affirmed. There was competent and substantial evidence to support the judge’s finding that the “going and coming rule” did not apply where claimant was responding to his employer’s request that he perform “a special errand or mission. ...”

AFFIRMED.

ERVIN and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur.

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

WIGGINTON, Judge.

The order of the judge of compensation claims finding claimant’s injury to be com-pensable is affirmed. There was competent and substantial evidence to support the judge’s finding that the “going and coming rule” did not apply where claimant was responding to his employer’s request that he perform “a special errand or mission. ...”

AFFIRMED.

ERVIN and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

557 So. 2d 220, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1156, 1990 WL 16885, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/welbro-construction-co-v-tucker-fladistctapp-1990.