Warner Trucking, Inc. v. Carolina Casualty Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• providing that an employee is not acting outside the scope of his employment merely because he violates a company rule and that the critical inquiry is not whether an employee violates an employer’s rule, but rather whether the employee is acting in the service of the employer
• “[I]mplied permission is inadequate as a matter of law to overcome [an] express restriction upon permission”
• “On appellate review, we construe the pleadings, affidavits, and designated materials in a light most favorable to the non-movant.” (emphasis added)
• where a truck driver's initial grant of permission was found to have been terminated when he drove after drinking because such action was in violation with a company policy on the use of alcohol
• material disputed facts are resolved in favor of non-movant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).