Remote Management of a Restaurant Is Not Enough to Find an Employee Was Acting Within the Scope and Course of His Employment

The issue in this case was whether the employee was in the course and scope of employment and/or acting in furtherance of the employer’s business at the time of the car accident.

The trial court granted summary judgment in the employer’s favor, finding that the employee was not acting within the course and scope of his employment at the time of the accident and, therefore, the employer’s insurance policy did not apply. The trial court’s judgment was affirmed.

Despite the argument that the employee, a restaurant manager, was acting within the scope of employment—he was managing his restaurant remotely while in another town and was giving a passenger, a regular restaurant customer, a ride on his way back to the restaurant at the end of the evening so that he could supervise closing of restaurant—the employee’s true purpose in going to another town was to socialize and further his own personal business opportunities. There was no indication that the driver went to other town for any business purpose to benefit the employer.

_{Case Law Alerts, 4th Quarter, October 2023 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2023 Marshall Dennehey, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}