Employer May Be Liable for Exec's Car Crash

An employer may be liable for personal injuries stemming from an executive's car crash that occurred when he was returning home from a business conference, a California appeals court has ruled.

The 2nd District Court of Appeal said the executive's attendance at an out-of-town conference may fall under a doctrine that holds an employer vicariously liable for accidents occurring while the employee is engaged in a "special errand" for the employer.

In addition, where the employee intends to drive home afterward, the "errand" is not concluded, even if he drives his regular commute route. Rather, the errand is not considered completed until the employee returns home or deviates from the errand for personal reasons, the panel explained.

According to the opinion, Marc Brandon, Warner Brothers Entertainment's vice president of anti-piracy Internet operations, attended a three-day business conference in Sunnyvale, Calif., in August 2006.

The event was sponsored by one of Warner's anti-piracy vendors. Warner approved the trip and paid for Brandon's airfare, hotel and airport parking.

On the return trip, Brandon decided to drive home from the airport instead of stopping by his office. He drove around the studio complex parking lot on his way, and then took his normal route home.

After driving about 3 miles, he was involved in an accident with another car that injured pedestrians Chuenchomporn Jeewarat, Tipphawan Tantisriyanurak and Kanhathai Vutthicharoen. Vutthicharoen later died from his injuries.

In February 2007 Jeewarat and Tantisriyanurak sued Brandon (the driver of the other car), Jared Southard and Warner in the Los Angeles County Superior Court.

The trial judge granted Warner summary judgment. The judge determined that because Brandon was commuting home from work when the accident occurred, under the "going and coming" rule, he was not acting within the course and scope of his employment.

The appellate court reversed.

The panel agreed with the plaintiffs' "special errand" reasoning and rejected Warner's argument that the doctrine does not apply to commercial travel.

The fact that Warner paid for Brandon's airfare, hotel and airport parking could lead a reasonable jury to infer that Warner expected to get some benefit from Brandon's attendance at the conference, the court said.

The panel rejected Warner's argument that even if Brandon's business trip could be considered a special errand, the errand ended when he drove past his office and resumed his regular commuting route around the time he usually left the office.

At the time of the accident, Brandon was traveling home from the airport, had no intention of going into his office and only passed the office coincidentally, the panel emphasized.

"Brandon intended to return home, and there were no intervening, personal deviations to remove him from the course and scope of employment," the panel said.

Because a special errand continues for the entirety of the trip, it did not end until Brandon arrived at home, the appeals court held.

To comment, ask questions or contribute articles, contact West.Andrews.Editor@ThomsonReuters.com.

The plaintiffs are represented by Abram Zukor and Marilyn Nelson of Zukor & Nelson in Beverly Hills, Calif.Counsel for Warner are Kevin Smith, Anne McIntyre and Nicholas Gedo of Wood, Smith, Henning & Berman in Glendale, Calif.