Court Cases Court Cases
AL  AK  AZ  AR  CA  CO  CT  DE  FL  GA  HI  ID  IL  IN  IA  KS  KY  LA  ME  MD  MA  MI  MN  MS  MO  MT  NE  NV 
NH  NJ  NM  NY  NC  ND  OH  OK  OR  PA  RI  SC  SD  TN  TX  UT  VT  VA  WA  WV  WI  WY  EO  NR  PR  DC  US 
 
View Summary
 
JERRY W. LECROY
vs.
BRAND SCAFFOLD BUILDING INC. CONSOLIDATED WITH JOSEPH V. BENNETT v. ]BRAND SCAFFOLD BUILDING INC.


Click Here to Read the Full Case Summary
 
Issues:
Marijuana, workers' compensation, manifest error, benefits, scope of employment
 
Case Summary:
Widows and dependents of Jerry W. Lecroy and Joseph Bennett, two employees of Brand Scaffolding Inc. who were killed in a car accident on their way to work, appeal a consolidated lower court ruling that limited the amount of death benefits awarded. Brand also appeals the ruling, arguing that since the two were killed away from the job site, they were not within the scope of their employment. Brand further argues that the presence of marijuana in the wrecked car and in employee's bloodstream disqualifies plaintiffs from receiving benefits.
 
Decision of lower jurisdiction:
The hearing officer for the District Six Office of Workers' Compensation Administration of Louisiana ruled in favor of plaintiffs, noting that Brand's $25 per diem payment for employees who lived more than 100 miles from the job site "constituted reimbursement for travel expenses and, therefore, defendants were within the course and scope of their employment at the time of the accident." Hearing officer also ruled that intoxication did not contribute to the accident, which occurred when the car was struck head-on by an oncoming vehicle that had crossed over the median.
 
Outcome:
Brand loses. The First Circuit Court of Appeal of Louisiana affirmed lower court ruling, noting that the $25 per diem was listed as a "travel expense" on employee's pay stubs, thereby placing them within the scope and course of their employment at the time of the accident. Appeals court further rules that there was "simply no evidence" that intoxication caused the accident, but denied plaintiff's appeals to remove cap on death benefits.