Brent Adams Wins Workers' Compensation Case Before Court of Appeals
Posted by
Robin MartinekApril 25, 2007 9:39 AMIn a unanimous decision, the North Carolina Court of Appeals found that workers who are required to bring their vehicles to work as part of their job can be compensated for injuries that occur as they are commuting to and from work. This ruling creates another exception to the normal "Coming and Going Rule" recognized in North Carolina, where injuries incurred while the employee is traveling to and from work are not compensable.
Norma Hollin, who was represented in this matter by Attorney Brent Adams, was a health care aide who provided in home assistance to patients in their homes. Since she was required to travel from one patient's home to another during her day, she was required to bring her own vehicle with her to work and was reimbursed for her mileage when traveling from one patient to another.
As she was traveling to her first work site on May 20, 2003, Ms. Hollin was involved in a head-on collision resulting in severe injuries and multiple operations. Ms. Hollin appealed her case to the Court of Appeals after the Industrial Commission found that these injuries were not inflicted "in the course" of her employment.
Prior to this decision, North Carolina's "coming and going rule" had only four exceptions:
(1) Premise exception - occurs while the employee is coming to or leaving from work but the accident occurs on the premises.
(2) Special errands exception - the worker is performing a special errand and acting in the course of their employment when the accident occurs.
(3) Traveling salesman exception - the employee has no specific time or place of employment and is required to travel to fulfill his job duties to the employer
(4) Contractual duty exception - the employer provides the transportation or pays for transportation associated with the travel
Following the majority of jurisdictions, the Court agreed that Ms. Hollin's claim was compensable based on the following:
Plaintiff [Ms. Hollin] was required as a condition of employment to use her personal vehicle while at work. "If the employee as part of his or her job is required to bring along his or her own car, truck or motorcycle for use during the working day, the trip to and from work is by that fact alone embraced within the course of employment." 1 Arthur Larson, Larson's Workers' Compensation Law § 15.05(1) (2006). Professor Larson notes that the reasoning behind the rule " is in part related to that of the employer-conveyance cases: the obligations of the job reach out beyond the premises, make the vehicle a mandatory part of the employment environment, and compel the employee to submit to the hazards associated with private motor travel, which otherwise he or she would have the option of avoiding. But in addition there is at work the factor of making the journey part of the job, since it is a service to the employer to convey to the premises a major piece of equipment devoted to the employer's purposes. . . . "Id. at § 15.05(2).
Through this ruling, the Court of Appeals overturned the Industrial Commission's decision and found that Ms. Hollin's injuries were compensable. In addition, the Court established a logical exception to North Carolina's "coming and going rule" that is already recognized in the majority of the states in our nation.