Short v. Miller

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the mere fact that the employee was “on call” did not constitute evidence that he was in the service of his employer when the collision occurred
• where the employee was riding around aimlessly with a friend at 2:00 a. m.
• where the employee was riding around aimlessly with a friend at 2:00 a.m.
• no evidence that “on call” employee was responding to any call to duty or was in performance of any duty to employer when collision occurred while employee was driving aimlessly around on Saturday night

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).