In a parking lot case, the Board finds the claimant's motor vehicle accident occurred within the course and scope of his employment because the claimant had returned to the employer's premises from an unpaid lunch break but had not yet clocked back in.

This case involved a Petition to Determine Compensation Due alleging that the claimant sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident on February 25, 2012, on an access roadway that was owned and controlled by his employer. The employer contended that the accident occurred outside the course and scope of the claimant's employment and was not compensable pursuant to the "going and coming rule."

There was no testimony presented. Rather, the parties stipulated to the facts, which showed that the claimant was a part-time inventory associate for the employer with a fixed location at the Middletown Store. The claimant's work shift included a mandatory one-hour, unpaid lunch break, and he was required to clock in and clock out when taking that break. On the day of the incident, the claimant had a co-worker drive him to a neighbor's house where he picked up a car for his own use. He then drove back to work without making any stops in between. The claimant was on the access road that was owned and controlled by the employer and was heading toward the parking lot when he was involved in a motor vehicle accident in which he sustained back injuries. Thereafter, he clocked in and returned to work and completed his shift that day.

The Board discussed the case law on the course and scope of employment issue and stated that, in order to be compensable, an injury must have been caused in a time and place where it would be reasonable for the employee to be under the circumstances. The Board also pointed out that a claimant does not have to be injured doing a job-related activity in order to be eligible for workers' compensation benefits. Applying the law to this case, the Board concluded that the claimant's injury occurred in the course and scope of his employment—he was returning to work from the lunch break and was on the employer's property at the time of the accident.

The winning argument as advanced by claimant's counsel was that the claimant's injuries, although occurring while going to and from work, were compensable since they had actually occurred on the employer's premises. The Board seemed to give great weight to the fact that the access road was owned and controlled by the employer. They clearly indicate that the result would have been different if the claimant's accident had occurred prior to his entering the access road. However, once he had returned to the employer's premises with the intent to return to work, the claimant came under the protection of the Compensation Act.

The Board awarded the claimant benefits for the limited period of temporary total disability, as well as necessary and reasonable medicals.

Case Law Alert - 1st Quarter 2013