{"id":"full_commission-H207041-2024-03-25","awcc_number":"H207041","decision_date":"2024-03-25","opinion_type":"full_commission","claimant_name":"Kenneth Williams","employer_name":"Malvern School District","title":"WILLIAMS VS. MALVERN SCHOOL DISTRICT AWCC# H207041 MARCH 25, 2024","outcome":"unknown","outcome_keywords":[],"injury_keywords":["back"],"pdf_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/Williams_Kenneth_H207041_20240325.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/full-commission-opinions/","filename":"Williams_Kenneth_H207041_20240325.pdf","text_length":27926,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION \n \n \nCLAIM NO.  H207041 \n \nKENNETH WILLIAMS (DEC’D), \nEMPLOYEE \n \nCLAIMANT \nMALVERN SCHOOL DISTRICT,  \nEMPLOYER \n \nRESPONDENT \nARKANSAS SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION, \nINSURANCE CARRIER/TPA \nRESPONDENT \n  \n      \nOPINION FILED MARCH 25, 2024 \n \nUpon review before the FULL COMMISSION in Little Rock, Pulaski County, \nArkansas. \n \nClaimant represented by the HONORABLE ANDY L. CALDWELL, Attorney \nat Law, Little Rock, Arkansas. \n \nRespondents represented by the HONORABLE MELISSA WOOD, Attorney \nat Law, Little Rock, Arkansas. \n \nDecision of Administrative Law Judge:  Reversed. \n \n \n OPINION AND ORDER \nThe respondents appeal an administrative law judge’s opinion filed \nJune 29, 2023.  The administrative law judge found that the claimant was \nperforming employment services at the time of his fatal accident.  After \nreviewing the entire record de novo, the Full Commission reverses the \nadministrative law judge’s opinion.  The Full Commission finds that the \nclaimant was not performing employment services at the time of the \naccidental injury.   \nI.  HISTORY \n\nWILLIAMS - H207041  2\n  \n \n \n The record shows that Kenneth Wayne Williams (d.o.b. 4-6-62) was \nmarried to Cynthia Cagle in Washington County, Arkansas on August 6, \n1988.  Cynthia Cagle Williams testified that she had remained married to \nKenneth Williams since that time.     \n On April 30, 2021, Ken Williams signed a TEACHER’S CONTRACT \nwith Malvern School District for the YEAR:  2021-2O22.  The period of time \ncovered by the contract was 225 days, from July 19, 2021 through June 23, \n2022.  The TEACHER’S CONTRACT provided that the claimant would \nperform services as follows:  “CLASSROOM TEACHING.”       \nThe parties stipulated that the employee-employer-carrier \nrelationship existed at all pertinent times, including “on or about April 26, \n2022.”  The record indicates that a Region II Spring Meeting was held at \n5:12 p.m. on April 26, 2022.  The meeting location was Goza Middle \nSchool, and Ken Williams participated in business conducted at the \nmeeting. \nJon Stevenson testified that he was employed as band director at \nMalvern Middle School and assistant band director at Malvern High School.  \nJon Stevenson testified that he had regularly worked with Ken Williams in \nband-related activities.  The claimant’s attorney examined Mr. Stevenson: \nQ.  Are you familiar with the Arkansas School Band and \nOrchestra Association? \nA.  Yes....It is an organization that allows other band directors \nand orchestra directors to get together to help our students \n\nWILLIAMS - H207041  3\n  \n \n \nwith performing activities such as All-Region band or concert \nassessment or marching assessments, and it’s a way for us to \nalso collaborate with each other and get together to figure out \nways to, you know, continue to teach our students band and \nmusic in general.... \nQ.  Do you have to be a member of that organization for the \nkids who are in your program to be able to do certain things? \nA.  Yes. \nQ.  What sort of things? \nA.  As I mentioned before, marching assessment is one of the \n– you have to be a member of ASBOA to marching \nassessment (sic), as well as concert assessment or also solo \nand ensemble, which is another performance opportunity for \nour students as well.   \nQ.  For the All-Region and All-State band? \nA.  Yes. \nQ.  So you have to be a member for the students to be eligible \nfor the events? \nA.  Yes. \nQ.  All right.  Do you know if Ken was a member? \nA.  Yes, he was.   \nQ.  And are you aware that there was a meeting that was \nscheduled for April 26, 2022? \nA.  Yes.  I believe I was at that meeting as well.... \nQ.  Do you know what this is? \nA.  [The witness peruses the document].  This is the agenda \nfor our spring meeting of that year. \nQ.  Was that meeting mandatory? \nA.  Yes. \nQ.  If you did not show up for that meeting what would \nhappen? \nA.  Usually what would happen is our Region Chair would \nnotify our principals or the school that we did not attend those \nmeetings.   \nQ.  So it was important that you be there. \nA.  Yes.   \nQ.  And it was required that you be there. \nA.  Yes.   \nQ.  Okay.  And does this appear to be the agenda showing \nthe start time of 5:12? \nA.  Yes.   \n\nWILLIAMS - H207041  4\n  \n \n \nQ.  Okay.  And it shows that it was at Goza Middle School.  \nDo you know where that is? \nA.  That’s in Arkadelphia.... \nQ.  Did you have permission from Ms. Shnaekel to go to that \nmeeting? \nA.  No.... \nQ.  And just to reiterate, this was a mandatory meeting, was it \nnot? \nA.  Yes.   \nQ.  You had to go. \nA.  Yes.   \nQ.  Okay.  And if you didn’t, they were gonna contact the \nadministration and tell  \n‘em you weren’t there. \nA.  Yes.... \nQ.  Do you know where Ken lived? \nA.  I know he lived in Malvern.... \nQ.  Do you know if Ken was going back to Malvern High \nSchool after the meeting? \nA.  I do not know.   \n \n According to the record, an ARKANSAS MOTOR VEHICLE CRASH \nREPORT indicated that three Motor Vehicles and one Non-Motorist were \ninvolved in a crash at 6:10 p.m. on April 26, 2022.  The CRASH LOCATION \nwas Interstate 30, Hot Spring County.  NON-MOTORIST INFORMATION \nindicated that Kenneth Wayne Williams was struck by Motor Vehicle #1 and \nsuffered a Fatal Injury.  A box indicating “No” was checked following the \ninformation, “Going to/from K-12 School.”  Mr. Williams’ location at the time \nof the crash was “Median/crossing island.”  The following NARRATIVE was \nincluded with the ARKANSAS MOTOR VEHICLE CRASH REPORT: \nOn 4/26/2022 at approximately 6:12 pm, I responded to a \nmulti-vehicle accident on I-30 East at the 86 mm.  Upon my \narrival on scene, Fire and Rescue was in the process of chest \n\nWILLIAMS - H207041  5\n  \n \n \ncompressions on a male subject that was struck in the median \nduring the accident.  LifeNet responded and pronounced the \npedestrian deceased on scene.  After speaking with the \nparties involved and looking at the evidence on scene, it was \ndetermined that V1 was traveling in the inside lane when he \napproached the previous accident scene.  V1 rear ended V2 \nwho was stopped in the inside traffic lane just prior to the \nprevious accident.  V2 was pushed into the center median \nbefore coming to rest.  After rear ending V2, V1 continued \neast before rear ending a parked V3 that was involved in a \nprevious accident.  V3 was pushed forward in the inside lane \nand came to rest after being struck by V1.  V1 then veered \ninto the center median where it lost the front passenger side \ntire of the vehicle before coming to rest against the guard wire \non the south side of I-30 West.  The tire V1 lost, continued \neast in the median before striking the male pedestrian who \nwas in the median helping occupants involved in the previous \naccident.   \n \n The parties stipulated that Kenneth Williams “sustained injuries that \nresulted in his death” on or about April 26, 2022.  Cindy Williams testified on \ndirect examination: \n  Q.  Do you know what happened to [Ken] on April 26\nth\n, 2022? \n  A.  I’ve been told, yes. \n  Q.  You weren’t there? \n  A.  No.   \n  Q.  Where were you at the time of the accident? \n  A.  I was traveling back to Malvern from my job in Maumelle.   \n  Q.  Okay.  And where were you working at the time? \n  A.  Maumelle Middle School.... \n  Q.  And how did you learn about his incident to begin with? \nA.  I received a text message, and I don’t really know how this \nworks but apparently, when you have emergency contacts – \nKen had it set up so that when he had emergency contacts in \nhis phone, that when you dial – when he would dial 911, it \nwould alert all the people who were his emergency contacts.  \nSo I got a message on my phone that he had dialed 911.   \nQ.  Okay.  And then, as I understand it, you tried to reach out \nto him? \n\nWILLIAMS - H207041  6\n  \n \n \nA.  Yes, multiple times.   \nQ.  And you briefly spoke to him? \nA.  No, I did not speak to him....There was a text. \nQ.  And what was the content of that text? \nA.  I had asked what’s goin’ on, and he said – he replied, “Not \nsure,” or “I don’t know,” but one of those.   \nQ.  All right.  And did you hear from him again? \nA.  No.   \nQ.  Okay.  Do you recall about what time of day on April 26, \n2022, that was? \nA.  Around 6:00, 5:30 or 6:00, 6:30.  I – it’s hard to remember.  \nIt was still daylight and it was the end of April.   \nQ.  And you didn’t speak to him again? \nA.  No. \nQ.  Okay.  And at the time, did you know where he was? \nA.  I knew he was returning from a meeting in Arkadelphia.  \nHe was returning to Malvern.   \nQ.  And what was your understanding as to what that meeting \nwas for? \nA.  Band.   \nQ.  And what was Ken’s occupation at the time of his \npassing? \nA.  A band director. \nQ.  Was he the high school band director for Malvern High \nSchool? \nA.  Yes, he was. \nQ.  And between your house and Malvern High School, if he \nwere to travel from Malvern High School to your home, would \nhe need to be on I-30? \nA.  Absolutely not.   \nQ.  Do you know where the incident occurred? \nA.  Yes, I do. \nQ.  Where was it? \nA.  It was on I-30.  I can’t remember mile marker but it was \nbetween Friendship and Malvern.   \nQ.  And that’s also between Arkadelphia and Malvern. \nA.  That is correct.... \nQ.  Do you know where Ken was going at the time of his \nincident? \nA.  It’s my knowledge that he was traveling back to Malvern.   \nQ.  Do you know where he was going in Malvern? \nA.  Not directly, no. \n\nWILLIAMS - H207041  7\n  \n \n \nQ.  Okay.  But he had not yet made it to Malvern. \nA.  No.   \n \n The respondents’ attorney cross-examined Ms. Williams: \nQ.  Both of us have introduced today the police report from \nthe accident that happened on April 26\nth\n, and you’ve reviewed \nthat, correct? \nA.  Yes. \nQ.  And you’d stated in your deposition that you read the \nnames of the individuals who were involved in the accident. \nA.  Yes, that is correct. \nQ.  And you did not know any of them? \nA.  No, I do not.   \nQ.  And you had no reason to believe that your husband knew \nany of them.  Is that right? \nA.  No, he did not.   \n \n On April 28, 2022, Gary Burton, Jr. posted a Local News story on \nKARK.com: \nThe Malvern School District family is mourning the loss of \ntheir longtime band director, 60-year-old Kenneth Williams. \nMr. Williams was hit and killed by a car Tuesday afternoon on \ninterstate-30 near mile marker 86 in Hot Springs (sic) county. \nThe Malvern school district tells us that Williams was heading \nback to Malvern from a regional band directors meeting in \nArkadelphia when he stopped to assist the victims involved in \na separate accident.... \nJon Stevenson, Malvern Assistant Band Director says his \nmentor, leader and friend, Mr. William (sic) was “always willing \nto help someone no matter what.”   \nTragically, Williams left this earth by doing just that, helping \nothers. \nAnother man was injured in this accident.  No one is being \ncharged.... \n \n An ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Vital Records \nCERTIFICATE OF DEATH was filed on May 3, 2022.  The CERTIFICATE \n\nWILLIAMS - H207041  8\n  \n \n \nOF DEATH indicated that Kenneth Wayne Williams died on April 26, 2022 \nas the result of an ACCIDENT at I-30 Mile Marker, Donaldson, Arkansas:  \n“DECEASED STOPPED TO ASSIST ON A (SIC) ACCIDENT SCENE AND \nWAS STRUCK BY ANOTHER VEHICLE.”    \n A pre-hearing order was filed on December 14, 2022.  The claimant \ncontended, “The Claimant’s AWW will be determined by the contract of hire, \nwage records and Arkansas law.  On April 26, 2022, the Claimant was \ntragically killed while on a school field trip.  The Respondents should be \nresponsible for all medical expenses incurred therewith and death and \nspousal benefits pursuant to the Act.  The Claimant is also entitled to \nreasonable and necessary attorney’s fees.  All other issues are reserved.”   \n The parties stipulated that the claim “has been controverted in its \nentirety.”  The respondents contended, “Respondents contend that \nClaimant did not suffer compensable injuries under the Arkansas Workers’ \nCompensation Act.”   \n The parties agreed to litigate the following issues: \n1.  Whether the Claimant sustained “compensable injury(ies)” \nthat resulted in death at a time when he was performing \nemployment services.   \n2.  If the Claimant’s alleged injury is deemed compensable, \nthe extent to which he is entitled to medical expenses \nincurred, spousal benefits, and funeral expenses. \n3.  Whether the Claimant’s attorney is entitled to a \ncontroverted fee.   \n \n\nWILLIAMS - H207041  9\n  \n \n \n A hearing was held on March 31, 2023.  At that time, the \nrespondents’ attorney examined Jennifer West Shnaekel: \n  Q.  What do you do for a living, Ms. Shnaekel? \n  A.  I’m the high school principal at Malvern School District.... \nQ.  You were the direct supervisor of Ken Williams.  Is that \ncorrect? \n  A.  Yes, for the school day.... \nQ.  Tell us what you would consider Mr. Williams’ job duties to \nhave been as band director there. \nA.  As band director he, of course, arrived early in the morning \nand had his band room open.  Band students always had \nband class first period.  The students would get there early, \nand some would go set up, and some would just visit.  But \nwhen I say early, as early as 7:30 a.m.  He had first period \nband there and then he would go to other campuses based on \nwhat that particular year’s class work looked like.  He \nattended football games.  He did flag line leader, Winter \nGuard, the flags participated in competitions, they would go to \nregional assessments, state assessments, always had two \nband concerts a year, participated in the baccalaureate for \nseniors, graduation, many events.... \nQ.  Did you know that Mr. Williams was going to Arkadelphia \nto attend any type of meeting? \nA.  Not that particular day.  No, ma’am.   \nQ.  Was there any paperwork presented to your office at all for \nthat trip? \nA.  I did not locate it in my file.   \nQ.  Was it mandatory for him to have attended? \nA.  I cannot say that.  Not being a member of ASBOA I’m not \nfamiliar with a mandatory meeting.  The educational events \nthat I’m a member of are not required meetings, but I cannot \nsay if this one was or not - not to my knowledge, but I cannot \ntestify as solid.   \nQ.  Mr. Caldwell took your deposition on January 13\nth\n of this \nyear.  Does that sound correct? \nA.  I do know that we spoke.  I apologize I can’t tell you the \ndate, but yes, it’s been recent.   \nQ.  At that time you testified that you didn’t know what the \nmeeting was about or he met with.  Is that true? \nA.  At that time I did not.   \n\nWILLIAMS - H207041  10\n  \n \n \nQ.  In your opinion, Ms. Shnaekel, did it benefit the school in \nany way for him to have stopped and helped someone on the \nside of the road? \nA.  Did it benefit the school? \nQ.  Correct. \nA.  No, ma’am.   \nQ.  As part of his job as band director, was he also required to \nbe a police officer? \nA.  No, ma’am. \nQ.  Was he required to be a firefighter? \nA.  No, ma’am. \nQ.  What about an EMT? \nA.  No, ma’am.   \n \n The administrative law judge examined Jennifer Shnaekel: \nJUDGE BLACK:  Based on what you know about this \norganization and the testimony that you’ve heard, did it in any \nway benefit the Malvern School District for Mr. Williams to \nattend this meeting? \nMS. SHNAEKEL:  For the planning of students and their \nopportunity to grow and develop, yes, I do believe that the \nplanning and all of the planning for our students to grow \nmusically and academically, it was a benefit to students.   \n \n An administrative law judge filed an opinion on June 29, 2023.  The \nadministrative law judge found that the claimant was performing \nemployment services at the time of his fatal accident.  The administrative \nlaw judge filed an amended opinion on July 27, 2023 which included the \nstipulation that Cindy Williams was “wholly and actually dependent” upon \nKen Williams in the event the Commission found that the accidental injury \nwas compensable.  The respondents appeal both opinions to the Full \nCommission.   \nII.  ADJUDICATION \n\nWILLIAMS - H207041  11\n  \n \n \n Act 796 of 1993, as codified at Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-102(4)(Repl. \n2012), provides, in pertinent part: \n  (A)  “Compensable injury” means: \n(i)  An accidental injury causing internal or external physical \nharm to the body ... arising out of and in the course of \nemployment and which requires medical services or results in \ndisability or death.  An injury is “accidental” only if it is caused \nby a specific incident and is identifiable by time and place of \noccurrence[.]... \n(B)  “Compensable injury” does not include: \n(iii) Injury which was inflicted upon the employee at a time \nwhen employment services were not being performed or \nbefore the employee was hired or after the employment \nrelationship was terminated[.]   \n \n An employee is performing employment services when he is doing \nsomething that is generally required by his employer.  Dairy Farmers of \nAmerica v. Coker, 98 Ark. App. 400, 255 S.W.3d 905.  The Arkansas Court \nof Appeals uses the same test to determine whether an employee is \nperforming employment services as it does when determining whether an \nemployee is acting within the course and scope of employment.  Pifer v. \nSingle Source Transp., 347 Ark. 851, 69 S.W.3d 1 (2002).  The test is \nwhether the injury occurred within the time and space boundaries of the \nemployment, when the employee was carrying out the employer’s purpose \nor advancing the employer’s interest, directly or indirectly.  Id.   \nThe employee has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the \nevidence that he sustained a compensable injury.  Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-\n102(4)(E)(i)(Repl. 2012).  Preponderance of the evidence means the \n\nWILLIAMS - H207041  12\n  \n \n \nevidence having greater weight or convincing force.  Metropolitan Nat’l \nBank v. La Sher Oil Co., 81 Ark. App. 269, 101 S.W.3d 252 (2003). \nAn administrative law judge found in the present matter, “3.  The \nClaimant was performing employment services at the time of his fatal \ndeath.\"  The Full Commission does not affirm this finding.  The record \nindicates that Ken Williams had been employed for approximately 30 years \nas a band director for the respondents, Malvern School District.  On April \n30, 2021, Mr. Williams signed a TEACHER'S CONTRACT with the \nrespondents wherein he agreed to provide the services, “CLASSROOM \nTEACHING.”  The period of time covered by the contract was July 19, 2021 \nthrough June 23, 2022.   \nAs we have discussed, the record shows that a Region II Spring \nMeeting was held at 5:12 p.m. on April 26, 2022 at Goza Middle School in \nArkadelphia, Arkansas.  The Region II Spring Meeting was apparently \naffiliated with the Arkansas School Band and Orchestra Association.  The \nrecord shows that Ken Williams attended the Region II Spring Meeting in \nArkadelphia and participated in the business conducted there.  Jon \nStevenson testified that the Region II Spring Meeting was a “mandatory” \nevent for band directors.  Jennifer Shnaekel, Malvern High School Principal, \ntestified that she was unsure with regard to whether or not the April 26, \n2022 event was indeed mandatory.  Upon questioning by the administrative \n\nWILLIAMS - H207041  13\n  \n \n \nlaw judge, Ms. Shnaekel agreed that the Malvern School District benefitted \nfrom Ken Williams’ attendance and participation in the Region II Spring \nMeeting.       \nAn ARKANSAS MOTOR VEHICLE CRASH REPORT indicates that \nKen Williams tragically suffered a fatal injury at approximately 6:10 p.m. on \nApril 26, 2022.  An Arkansas State Police NARRATIVE showed that Ken \nWilliams had exited his personal vehicle to assist other motorists involved in \na motor vehicle accident on Interstate 30 in Hot Spring County.  Mr. \nWilliams’ location at the time of the pedestrian accident in which he was \ninvolved was Median/crossing island” and a box indicating “No” was \nchecked following the information, “Going to/from K-12 School.”  The \nNARRATIVE stated that Ken Williams was struck by a tire which had been \nlost from a vehicle.     \nThe relevant question in the present matter is not whether the \nrespondents benefitted from Kenneth Williams’ attendance at the Region II \nSpring Meeting on April 26, 2022.  Instead, the critical inquiry in accordance \nwith Act 796 is whether the claimant was performing employment services \nwhen the injury occurred.   See Parker v. Comcast Cable Corp., 100 Ark. \nApp. 400, 269 S.W.3d 391 (2007), citing Moncus v. Billingsley Logging, 366 \nArk. 383, 235 S.W.3d 877 (2006).  The Commission must strictly construe \nthe provisions of Act 796 of 1993.  See Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-\n\nWILLIAMS - H207041  14\n  \n \n \n704(c)(3)(Repl. 2012).  The doctrine of strict construction requires use of \nthe plain meaning of the statutory language.  Edens v. Superior Marble & \nGlass, 346 Ark. 487, 58 S.W.3d 369 (2001).  The Commission is bound to \nexamine the activity the claimant was engaged in at the time of the accident \nin determining whether or not he was performing employment services.  Hill \nv. LDA Leasing, 2010 Ark. App. 271, 374 S.W.3d 268 (2010).  The \npreponderance of evidence in the present matter demonstrates that the \nclaimant was not directly or indirectly benefitting his employer when he \nexited his vehicle and entered the median on Interstate 30 on the evening \nof April 26, 2022.  The Full Commission finds credible Jennifer Shnaekel’s \ntestimony that the claimant’s actions following the motor vehicle accident on \nApril 26, 2022 did not benefit the Malvern School District.  Again, the critical \ninquiry is whether the claimant was performing employment services when \nthe injury occurred.  See Parker, supra.  \nAn employee is performing employment services when he is doing \nsomething that is generally required by his employer.  Coker, supra.  The \nrecord in the present matter shows that Ken Williams was acting nobly and \ngenerously when offered assistance to other individuals following a motor \nvehicle accident on April 26, 2022, while the claimant was returning to \nMalvern from Arkadelphia.  Nevertheless, the evidence does not \n\nWILLIAMS - H207041  15\n  \n \n \ndemonstrate that Mr. Williams was performing employment services at the \ntime of his tragic fatality.  \nAfter reviewing the entire record de novo, the Full Commission finds \nthat the claimant was not performing employment services when he \nsustained a fatal accidental injury on April 26, 2022.  The Full Commission \ntherefore reverses the administrative law judge’s opinion, and this claim is \nrespectfully denied and dismissed. \nIT IS SO ORDERED. \n \n    ___________________________________ \n    SCOTTY DALE DOUTHIT, Chairman \n \n    ___________________________________ \n    MICHAEL R. MAYTON, Commissioner \n \n \n \nCommissioner Willhite concurs and dissents. \nDISSENTING OPINION \nAfter a de novo review of the record in this claim, I dissent from the \nmajority opinion finding that the Claimant was not performing employment \nservices at the time of his death.                                                                                     \n The Claimant was employed as a band director for the Malvern \nSchool District for approximately 30 years.  On April 26, 2022, Claimant \nattended an Arkansas State Band and Orchestra Association (hereinafter \n“ASBOA”) meeting in Arkadelphia to discuss dates and hosts of regional \n\nWILLIAMS - H207041  16\n  \n \n \nevents for the students of ASBOA.  During the trip home, the Claimant \nencountered an accident on I-30 near the 86-mile marker.  The credible \nproof suggests that the inside eastbound lane of I-30 was blocked and \ntraffic in that lane, including the Claimant’s vehicle, came to a halt.  Before \ntraffic was cleared, another vehicle heading eastbound struck multiple \nvehicles and lost the front passenger-side tire which struck the Claimant \nwho was outside his vehicle assisting accident victims.  The Claimant \nsuccumbed to his injuries and was pronounced deceased on scene.  The \nprimary issue is whether the Claimant was performing employment services \nat the time of his injury and death.                      \n The Arkansas Supreme Court has held that an employee is \nperforming employment services when he or she “is doing something that is \ngenerally required by his or her employer.”  Texarkana Sch. Dist. v. Conner, \n373 Ark. 372, 284 S.W.3d 57 (2008).  Specifically, it has been held that the \ntest is whether the injury occurred “within the time and space boundaries of \nthe employment, when the employee was carrying out the employer’s \npurpose or advancing the employer’s interest directly or indirectly.  Id.  The \ncritical inquiry is whether the interests of the employer were being directly or \nindirectly advanced by the employee at the time of the injury.  Id.  Lastly, \nthe issue of whether an employee is performing employment services within \n\nWILLIAMS - H207041  17\n  \n \n \nthe course of employment depends on the particular facts and \ncircumstances of each case. Id.   \nThe trial testimony indicates that the ASBOA meeting was a work-\nrelated event.  John Stevenson was a co-worker of the Claimant and \ntestified that the ASBOA meeting was mandatory for band directors.  The \nagenda for the ASBOA meeting demonstrates a direct connection to school \nrelated business.  The meeting included discussions relating to electing \nnew officers as well as dates and events for ASBOA.  Mr. Stevenson further \nclarified the direct benefit to the Malvern School District in that it outlined \nevents for the students.  Therefore, the Claimant was performing \nemployment services by attending the ASBOA meeting.  The remaining \nissue is whether the Claimant deviated from the course and scope of his \nemployment on his journey back to Malvern by exiting his vehicle to provide \nassistance to other stranded motorists.        \nAs stated in 2 Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 17:     \nAn identifiable deviation from a business trip for personal reasons  \ntakes the employee out of the course of employment until the  \nemployee returns to the route of the business trip, unless the  \ndeviation is so small as to be disregarded as insubstantial.                                                        \n At the time of this tragic accident the Claimant was attempting to \nreturn home from a work-related event.  He would not have been in this \n\nWILLIAMS - H207041  18\n  \n \n \nlocation if not for the fact that he attended the ASBOA work-related \nconference.  Up to the time that the Claimant stopped his vehicle in \nresponse to the other traffic which had come to a halt on I-30, there \nappears to be no serious dispute that Claimant was performing employment \nservices.  The record then suggests that the Claimant exited his vehicle to \nassist three occupants of a Nissan Sentra that was stopped in front of his \nvehicle.  During the Claimant’s attempt to provide assistance he was struck \nand killed.  Additionally, there is no credible proof in the record that the \nRespondent prohibited the Claimant from providing such assistance under \nthese circumstances.  It is my opinion that the Claimant’s actions were not a \nsignificant deviation from the course and scope of his employment, and that \nhe was performing employment services for the Respondent at the time of \nthis accident.  The Claimant’s trip back to Malvern was a necessary part of \nhis work-related conference.  The Claimant could have sustained injuries \nwhether he remained in his vehicle or not, and it does not seem reasonable \nto conclude that his attempt to provide assistance to the stranded motorists \nis such a deviation from the course and scope of his employment duties to \nfind the claim is not compensable.      \n Therefore, I dissent from the majority and find that the Claimant was \nperforming employment services at the time of his fatal injury. \n \n\nWILLIAMS - H207041  19\n  \n \n \n    ___________________________________ \n    M. SCOTT WILLHITE, Commissioner","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. H207041 KENNETH WILLIAMS (DEC’D), EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT MALVERN SCHOOL DISTRICT, EMPLOYER RESPONDENT ARKANSAS SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION, INSURANCE CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION FILED MARCH 25, 2024","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:29:45.909Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/full_commission-H207041-2024-03-25","pdf":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/Williams_Kenneth_H207041_20240325.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/full-commission-opinions/"}}