Smith v. Bob Evans Farms
Indiana Court of Appeals
754 N.E.2d 18 (2001)
- Written by Whitney Punzone, JD
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…
Here's why 815,000 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.