USA Trucks, Inc. v. Jarrell
2016 Ark. App. 484
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- James Jarrell attended USA Truck’s training school, then went through orientations and trainer-led road training; he was a trainee required to follow trainer instructions.
- Trainer told Jarrell the top bunk in the truck was his and instructed him to sleep in the truck so they could leave very early the next morning; Jarrell understood this as an instruction.
- The morning after sleeping in the truck, the trainer woke Jarrell and instructed him to perform a pretrip inspection immediately.
- As Jarrell climbed down from the top bunk to get dressed and begin the inspection, he accidentally stepped into a crock pot of hot water and suffered severe burns to both feet.
- Jarrell filed for workers’ compensation; USA Truck denied compensability arguing he was not performing employment services when injured. The ALJ and the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission found the injury compensable and USA Trucks appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Jarrell was performing "employment services" at the time of injury | Jarrell: Waking to perform a trainer-directed pretrip inspection and having been required to sleep in the truck means he was advancing employer’s interest | USA Trucks: At the moment of injury Jarrell was merely getting out of bed performing a personal task; routine morning activity is not employment services | Court: Jarrell was performing employment services — he had been required to sleep in the truck and was acting on a trainer’s instruction to begin a pretrip inspection when injured |
Key Cases Cited
- Cook v. ABF Freight Sys., 88 Ark. App. 86 (analysis that routine morning grooming while off-duty is not performing employment services)
- Kinnebrew v. Little John’s Truck, Inc., 66 Ark. App. 90 (holding showering during an off-duty rest break is not compensable employment service)
- Texarkana Sch. Dist. v. Conner, 373 Ark. 372 (defining inquiry: time/space boundaries and whether employee was advancing employer’s interest)
- Wallace v. W. Fraser South, Inc., 365 Ark. 68 (framework that compensable injuries exclude those when employment services are not being performed)
- Hill v. LDA Leasing, Inc., 2010 Ark. App. 271 (standard of appellate review for Commission decisions)