Legal Opinion

Smithey v. Hansberger

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided December 31, 1996No. 1 CA-CV 96-0189PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

RYAN, Judge.

In this appeal, we consider whether a worker who voluntarily drove a van that was part of an employer-provided van pool was acting in the scope of his employment. We conclude that he was, and thus affirm the trial court’s decision precluding employees injured in an accident while passengers in the van from suing that co-worker for damages.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On March 22, 1994, appellee Robert Hans-berger, an employee of Arizona Public Service (“APS”), was driving an APS van with six other APS employees as passengers when the van was involved in a single vehicle…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Tovrea Land and Cattle Company v. LinsenmeyerArizona Supreme Court · 1966
  2. Hill-Shafer Partnership v. Chilson Family TrustArizona Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Watson v. GrimmCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1952
  4. Luth v. Rogers and Babler Construction CompanyAlaska Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Smith v. American Express Travel Related Services Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1994

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Lustgraaf v. BehrensCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2010
  2. McCloud v. STATE, DEPT. OF PUBLIC SAFETYCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
  3. Thayer v. StateSupreme Court of Iowa · 2002
  4. Engler v. Gulf Interstate Engineering, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2011
  5. Gnatkiv v. MachkurCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2016

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API