Court Opinion

ID: 9687430
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 16:27:50.296372+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:07:27.779866
License: Public Domain

Rogosheske, Justice
(concurring specially).
I concur in the result. There is evidentiary support for an inference that the employee was exposed to a different and greater risk than if he had been pursuing his ordinary personal affairs. Here the environment of the occasion — the stress of persuading a prospective customer, to please him, and to make him more receptive — is a different circumstance than the ordinary leisurely consumption of an evening meal. The employee was discussing business at the time he choked. It was a late dinner commencing at 7:30 and the order had not yet been obtained. *389While it may be that such choking occurs from bad eating habits, it is not unreasonable for a factfinder to conclude that the stress and tension of making a sale caused the employee to lapse into the type of careless eating habits which caused his choking.