DEBORAH HOLMES, INDIVIDUALLY, AND CHRISTINE LUKAS, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF JOAN LUKAS, DECEASED, APPELLANTS,
v.
CARROLL AIR SYSTEMS, INC., AND AMERICAN SOCIETY OF HEATING, REFRIGERATING AND AIR CONDITIONING ENGINEERS, INC., APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Deborah Holmes and the estate of Joan Lukas appealed summary judgments dismissing their wrongful death and personal injury claims against Carroll Air Systems and ASHRAE, arising from an automobile accident caused by a Carroll Air employee. The appellate court affirmed dismissal of the ASHRAE claim but reversed and remanded the Carroll Air claim, finding factual disputes regarding whether the employee was acting within the scope of employment when the accident occurred.
The court affirmed the summary judgment in favor of ASHRAE as fully supported but reversed the summary judgment in favor of Carroll Air, finding that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding whether Mills was acting in the course and scope of his employment at the time of the accident, precluding summary judgment on that claim.
[1] A summary judgment is affirmed when it is fully supported by the evidence.
[2] A summary judgment is reversed and remanded when genuine issues of fact exist regarding whether an employee was acting within the course and scope of employment at the ti…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“we are equally convinced that summary judgment in favor of Carroll Air is premature as there are genuine issues of fact existing with regard to whether Mills was in the course and scope of his employment at the time of the accident”
Establishes the court's holding that factual disputes precluded summary judgment on the scope of employment question for the Carroll Air claim
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJohn C. Mills, an employee of Carroll Air Systems and ASHRAE member, attended an ASHRAE dinner meeting while employed by Carroll Air. After the dinner…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Course And Scope Of Employment cases and more on FLexlaw
DOWNEY, Judge.
Appellants appeal from summary judgments entered against them and in favor of appellees.
Appellants sued appellees for the wrongful death of Joan Lukas and for personal injuries suffered by her daughter, Deborah Holmes, in an automobile accident involving Holmes and Lukas and John C. Mills, an employee of appellee Carroll Air Systems, Inc., (Carroll Air) and a member of appellee, The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers, Inc., (ASHRAE).
It appears that, while an employee of Carroll Air, Mills attended a dinner meeting of ASHRAE. After the dinner many of the persons attending repaired to a cocktail lounge in the same hotel and partook of additional drinks. Around midnight the party broke up and Mills headed directly home in his car. An accident occurred on the way when he ran into the Holmes car that was stopped at a red light. In due course, appellants filed this suit, contending that Mills was in the course and scope of his employment with Carroll Air at the time of the accident. His membership in ASHRAE is the basis for the joinder of ASHRAE as a defendant.
Without detailing all of the evidence appearing in the record, we believe the summary judgment in favor of ASHRAE is fully supported. However, we are equally convinced that summary judgment in favor of Carroll Air is premature as there are genuine issues of fact existing with regard to whether Mills was in the course and scope of his employment at the time of the accident. That being the case, we affirm the summary judgment in favor of ASH-RAE and reverse the summary judgment for Carroll Air and remand the cause for further proceedings vis-a-vis Carroll Air. WALDEN, J., and SHARP, WINIFRED J., Associate Judge, concur.