Smith v. Bob Evans Farms

754 N.E.2d 18 (2001)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Smith v. Bob Evans Farms

Indiana Court of Appeals
754 N.E.2d 18 (2001)

Facts

Raymond Smith, Jr., worked as an area director for Bob Evans Farms (Bob Evans) (defendant). In 1996 Raymond attended the grand opening of a new restaurant. On the day of the grand opening, Raymond called his wife about how well the day was going and subsequently sat down for lunch with his coworkers, which was provided by Bob Evans. A few minutes after eating lunch, Raymond collapsed and died. The medical examiner determined that Raymond’s cause of death was asphyxiation. On behalf of Raymond, Dianne Smith, Raymond Smith III, and Colin Dennis Smith (collectively, the Smiths) (plaintiffs) filed for workers’-compensation benefits. In August 2000, a single member of the Worker’s Compensation Board (the board) awarded compensation, finding that Raymond’s unusual stress increased the risk of choking and, therefore, his death was an accident arising out of employment. Bob Evans filed an application for review with the full board. The board reversed the decision and award, finding that Raymond’s death was not the result of an increased risk related to his employment and, therefore, did not arise out of his employment. The Smiths appealed, arguing that there was a causal connection between Raymond’s death and his employment. To support their position, the Smiths argued that Raymond was the area director, was required to attend the grand opening, oversaw the grand opening and was responsible for its success or failure, had a work lunch with a meal provided by Bob Evans, and was performing duties in furtherance of business, and that the activities at the opening directly and inadvertently advanced Bob Evans’s interests.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Brook, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 735,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 735,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 735,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership