Cattlemen's Steakhouse, Inc. v. Waldenville, 2013 OK 95

John David Waldenville, an Oklahoma County Deputy (Major) and part‑time security guard for Cattlemen’s, was ambushed, shot in the head, and robbed while making a nightly bank deposit for Cattlemen’s.
At the time of the injury Waldenville: was paid by Cattlemen’s; was wearing his deputy uniform; carried his personal sidearm and badge; and used a county police cruiser to travel to the shift (with county permission to work private security).
Cattlemen’s initially denied employment/coverage but later acknowledged paying premiums on amounts paid to Waldenville; the trial court found Waldenville entitled to compensation, dismissed Oklahoma County as liable, and combined his two salaries to compute benefits.
Cattlemen’s sought review arguing Waldenville was acting as a deputy (so county liable) and that the two employments/salaries should not be combined; Oklahoma County argued the private employer alone was liable under statute.
The Supreme Court retained the case to decide (1) whether a political subdivision employer may be required to provide workers’ compensation when an off‑duty municipal employee is injured while working for a private employer, and (2) whether the deputy’s full‑time and part‑time salaries may be combined to calculate benefits.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Waldenville)	Defendant's Argument (Cattlemen's)	Held
Who is liable for WC when an off‑duty county employee is injured while employed by a private employer?	Private employer (Cattlemen’s) is solely liable under the statute for injuries during hours of actual employment by the private employer.	The employee was performing duties as a deputy; county should be liable because he was acting in his official capacity.	Statute (85 O.S. § 313(G)) unambiguously makes the private employer solely liable for injuries occurring during the hours of actual employment by the private employer; Cattlemen’s is liable.
May the injured worker’s full‑time deputy salary and part‑time security salary be combined to determine average weekly wage?	Wages are combinable because the private security duties were the same or substantially similar to deputy duties (protecting property, issuing warnings/tickets, arrest power apparent).	Salaries should not be combined because the security job was distinct from deputy duties.	Under the facts (uniform, badge, weapon, cruiser, comparable duties), the employments were the same or substantially similar; the wages may be combined to compute benefits.

City of Hialeah v. Weber, 491 So.2d 1204 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986) (off‑duty officer acting as private security performed police functions)
State v. Wilen, 589 N.W.2d 650 (Neb. Ct. App. 1995) (off‑duty officer’s actions viewed as official capacity for criminal charge purposes)
Geneva‑Pearl Oil & Gas Co. v. Hickman, 296 P. 954 (Okla. 1931) (average wages/occupation focus for combining earnings)
Fox Bldg. Supply Co. v. Bond, 604 P.2d 859 (Okla. 1979) (employments must be identical or substantially similar to combine wages)
Wal‑Mart Stores, Inc. v. Switch, 878 P.2d 357 (Okla. 1994) (statutory method for calculating compensation rate)