Convenient store employee’s injury was compensable because his actions were not a substantial deviation from his employment and he was acting in the interest of his employer when he left the store’s premesis.
Employee McGriff (McGriff) was a third-shift sales clerk at a Scotchman convenient store (Scotchman). McGriff left the store and entered the roadway to speak to Chennault, a neighbor and friend who was seeking employment at Scotchman. Chennault was driving a truck and was stopped in the road. There was very little traffic. After a very brief conversation, McGriff turned to leave Chennault and was hit by a car. McGriff sought Worker’s Compensation benefits for his injury. The employer alleged that McGriff’s injury did not arise out of his employment or occur during the course and scope of his employment.
The single Commissioner, the Appellate Panel, and the Circuit Court all found that McGriff’s injury was compensable. The Court of Appeals affirmed compensability because McGriff’s injury arose out of and was in the course of his employment. McGriff’s injury arose out of his employment because his duties included being outside of the store, affirmatively soliciting new employees, and responding to management about potential new hires. Further, McGriff was acting in good faith and in the interest of his employer when his injury occurred. McGriff’s injury occurred in the course of his employment because McGriff never abandoned his employment, the conversation was close to the store and very brief, and the record supported the conclusion that his deviation was not so substantial as to remove him from the course and scope of his employment.
