Cheshire v. Putman
Supreme Court of Alabama
1ConcurrenceMurdock, Justice
I concur in the result because of the manner in which the issue of payment of *346or reimbursement for transportation expenses to and from work appears to have been addressed in the trial court, but not in the appellant’s initial brief to this Court. In so doing, I do not wish to be understood as suggesting that the exception to the general rule (that an employee’s negligence while traveling to and from work does not subject an employer to vicarious liability) when the employee’s transportation expenses are paid or reimbursed, as it is described in the main opinion, is generally applicable to…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Gilmore v. Rust Engineering CompanySupreme Court of Alabama · 1972
- Ammons v. McClendonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1955
- Shaw v. CB & E., INC.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1993