Tran v. DAVE'S ELEC. CO. INC.
2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1521
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Tran sues Hale (president) and the Company for injuries from a vehicle accident caused by Hale.
- Hale was the Company's President and sole Director; the other officer was her ex-husband, David Hale.
- On the date of the accident, Hale drove to the office from home for a workers' compensation audit and would normally have worked from home due to weather.
- Hale was the only Company representative available to meet the auditor at the time and could not cancel or reschedule the appointment.
- The trial court submitted the respondeat superior issue to the jury; the jury found Hale personally liable but the Company not liable for vicarious liability.
- Tran moved for JNOV; the trial court denied; the appellate court reverses and remands for entry of JNOV in Tran's favor.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Hale was acting within course and scope under the special errand doctrine | Tran: Hale's trip served employer needs, constituting a special errand. | Dave's Electric: Accidents during going-to/from-work are generally not within scope; no special errand. | Yes; Hale was on a special errand, making the Company vicariously liable. |
Key Cases Cited
- Custer v. Hartford Ins. Co., 174 S.W.3d 602 (Mo.App. W.D. 2005) (special errand applicable when trip serves employer needs and is non-routine)
- Hilton v. Pizza Hut, 892 S.W.2d 625 (Mo.App. W.D. 1994) (special errand not applicable where employee had flexible options to satisfy employer demand)
- Logan v. Phillips, 891 S.W.2d 542 (Mo.App. E.D. 1995) (testimony in court is routine duty; not a special errand)
- All Am. Painting, LLC v. Fin. Solutions and Assocs., Inc., 315 S.W.3d 719 (Mo. banc 2010) (directed verdict standard; unusual situation justifies JNOV for plaintiff)
- Tuttle v. Muenks, 964 S.W.2d 514 (Mo.App. W.D. 1998) (going-and-coming rule; exceptions when special errand exists)