Pyne v. Witmer
Illinois Supreme Court
543 N.E.2d 1304 (1989)
- Written by Nicholas Decoster, JD
Facts
William Witmer (defendant) worked at a gas station owned by D.R.W. Enterprises, Inc. (D.R.W.) (defendant). In order to obtain a certification to become an automobile mechanic for D.R.W., Witmer left work one afternoon and traveled to another town to take a certification test. Around two and a half hours after finishing the test, Witmer died in an automobile collision with a vehicle driven by Keith Pyne (plaintiff). Witmer was deemed to be intoxicated at the time of the collision. Pyne brought a claim against D.R.W. under a theory of respondeat superior, arguing that Witmer was acting within the scope of employment at the time of the accident. At trial, Witmer’s widow testified that Witmer had suggested he might stay out after the exam to study for another session of the test. D.R.W. argued that Witmer’s intoxication took him outside the scope of employment, and filed a motion for summary judgment. The circuit court granted the motion, but Pyne appealed. The appellate court reversed. D.R.W. appealed the decision.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Stamos, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
