831 So. 2d 424 - Brooks v. Guerrero’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “An employee using his employer’s supplied vehicle to go on a lunch break has previously been found to be within the course and scope of employment when an accident occurred. The court found" in that case that the.city not only acquiesced in, but authorized the 17use of its vehicles by employees for this purpose. In the present case,-the record shows that Mr. Brooks was on his lunch hour with Mr. Guerrero. The mere fact that an employee is performing a personal errand while on an employment related errand does not automatically compel the conclusion that the deviation removes the employee from the course and scope of employment. An employee’s personal mission and his employer’s business are not necessarily mutually exclusive. [[Image here]] In the present case, Brooks was riding in his employer’s truck, the operation of which was in performance of his employment responsibility, and was authorized to use the vehicle at lunchtime as an incident of employment, to advance effective use of work time i.e., to further the employer’s concerns. Going to lunch in the truck thus arose out of the nature of the .particular employment, which employment required the workers to be on the road during the course of the workday. [Footnotes omitted.],”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 185 So. 3d 830 - Sharp v. United Fire & Indemnity Co.