Court Opinion

ID: 9771711
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 16:51:44.96237+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:41:22.000086
License: Public Domain

LIMBAUGH, Judge,
concurring.
I concur in the outcome of this case and also in the rationale, except to the extent that it can be read to allow recovery on no more proof than an employer’s “invitation” to its employees to park in a designated off-premises lot. Crucial to employee’s recovery, in my view, is the additional fact that Tyson Foods apparently obtained permission from the owners of the lot before suggesting that the employees may park there. Only in this way was the lot “so appropriated” by Tyson or “so situate, designed and used” by Tyson and its employees that it became an extension of the premises.