Legal Opinion

CARROLL v. CAPITOL ONE AUTO FINANCE, INC.

Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma

Decided February 13, 2015No. 113,028PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

KENNETH L. BUETTNER, Judge.

T1 Petitioner Amanda Carroll seeks review of an order of the Workers' Compensation Court of Existing Claims, which found Carroll did not sustain a compensable injury. Respondent Capitol One Auto Finance (Employer) argued Carroll's injury was not com-pensable because it occurred in an area not controlled by Employer and where essential job functions are not performed. The trial court's decision is not against the clear weight of the evidence or contrary to law and we sustain.

I 2 In her Form 3, Carroll sought compensation for a single incident injury incurred…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Intermedix Corp. v. WolfCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2013
  2. Leandro v. American Staffcorp, Inc.Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2013
  3. CARNEY v. DIRECTV GROUP, INC.Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2013

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. CARROLL v. CAPITOL ONE AUTO FINANCE, INC.Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2015

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

Powered by the Exa API