## Facts

- Leroyal Harris, Sr. worked at a Sears warehouse on Whitney Avenue in Louisiana.
- On May 3, 1978, severe rain caused extensive flooding at the warehouse and surrounding area, including standing water inside the building and rising water in the parking lot.
- Sears informed employees they could leave because of the continuing conditions.
- Harris did not leave immediately; he waited and then decided to go home after the building became fully flooded.
- Harris’s supervisor stated he appeared nervous, said he needed to get home to his family, and left despite being advised to wait for Sears technicians who were pushing cars to higher ground.
- Shortly after leaving the parking area and driving onto Whitney Boulevard, Harris’s vehicle floated, was swept into the Whitney Canal, and he drowned after being pulled into a culvert during unsuccessful rescue efforts by Sears technicians.
- Harris’s widow, individually and on behalf of their minor children, sought workers’ compensation death benefits under La. R.S. 23:1031.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court erred by granting a motion for new trial that was filed before the initial written judgment was signed.
2. Whether the trial court was manifestly erroneous in finding the death arose out of and in the course of employment under La. R.S. 23:1031 despite the employee’s apparent attempt to go home.

## Decision

- The appellate court affirmed the judgment awarding workers’ compensation death benefits.
- The court held the motion for new trial was not invalid merely because it was filed before a written judgment was signed.
- The court held the trial court was not clearly wrong in finding the death compensable because the flooding emergency arose while the employee was at work and directly contributed to the fatal risk shortly after departure.

## Legal Principles

- Louisiana procedural rules are construed liberally; a premature motion for new trial may be treated as valid when it provides notice and is acted upon, consistent with La. C.C.P. art. 5051.
- Under La. R.S. 23:1031, compensability requires an accident “arising out of and in the course of” employment.
- The “going and coming” rule generally bars compensation for ordinary commuting injuries, but it does not automatically apply where extraordinary, employment-connected conditions create or materially increase the risk at the time the employee leaves work.
- Appellate review of workers’ compensation fact findings applies the manifest error/clearly wrong standard.

## Conclusion

The court upheld an award of death benefits, ruling that liberal procedural construction allowed a new trial motion filed before entry of a written judgment and that an employee’s flood-related drowning shortly after leaving a worksite during an on-the-job emergency arose out of and in the course of employment.


Harris v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 485 So. 2d 965 (La. Ct. App. 1986)