Arbelaez v. Just Brakes Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding fact issue on course and scope raised by evidence employee was complying with employer’s request to make “breakfast run” that benefited both employee and employer
• holding fact issue on course and scope raised by evidence employee was complying with employer’s request to make “breakfast run” that benefitted both employee and employer
• holding employee was in the -9- 04-16-00739-CV course and scope of employment when collision occurred while he was making a “breakfast run” at his manager’s affirmative request
• holding fact issue on course and scope raised by evidence employee was complying with employer = s request to make A breakfast run @ that benefitted both employee and employer
• noting the traditional scope- of-employment analysis in respondeat-superior cases “concerns only whether the employee is discharging the duties generally assigned to her”
• proof required that employee's act was \for the accomplishment of the object for which the employee was employed.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).