Loftus v. Three Palms Croaker Park, LLC, 211 N.E.3d 771, Ohio App. 8 Dist., 2023

The issue in this case was whether the employee was in the course and scope of employment and/or acting in furtherance of the employer’s business at the time of the car accident.

The trial court granted summary judgment in the employer’s favor, finding that the employee was not acting within the course and scope of his employment at the time of the accident and, therefore, the employer’s insurance policy did not apply. The trial court’s judgment was affirmed.

Despite the argument that the employee, a restaurant manager, was acting within the scope of employment—he was managing his restaurant remotely while in another town and was giving a passenger, a regular restaurant customer, a ride on his way back to the restaurant at the end of the evening so that he could supervise closing of restaurant—the employee’s true purpose in going to another town was to socialize and further his own personal business opportunities. There was no indication that the driver went to other town for any business purpose to benefit the employer.