Cases from cite.case.law:

DAVIS, v. PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF S OFFICE USIS,, 196 So. 3d 543 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Statutes (2012), to his subsequent intervening accident for which he sought coverage under subsection 440.092 . . . receiving remedial treatment at the time of his motor vehicle accident pursuant to Florida Statutes 440.092 . . . The JCC erred, however, in then reading subsections 440.092(2), (3), (4), and (5) to “require an injury . . . Subsections 440.092(2), (3), and (4) do involve circumstances where the injury “arises out of’ work-related . . . Because subsection 440.092(5) is silent on any reporting requirement, we must look to section 440.19, . . .

EVANS, v. HOLLAND KNIGHT, 194 So. 3d 551 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Subsection 440.092(2), Florida Statutes (2014), provides that “[a]n injury suffered while going to or . . .

LEVY COUNTY SHERIFF S OFFICE v. ALLEN,, 140 So. 3d 1150 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . 440.091(1), Florida Statutes, or non-compensable because he was “going to or coming from” work under 440.092 . . . by the employee, unless the employee was engaged in a special errand or mission for the employer.” § 440.092 . . . The employer/carrier argued that that section 440.092(2) applies because it is an exception to and more . . . Stated differently, it views section 440.092(2) as precluding a finding of compensability if an officer . . . suffers an injury while going to or coming from work, the only two exceptions being those in 440.092 . . .

URBINA, v. KINDRED HOSPITAL- NORTH FLORIDA CMS,, 103 So. 3d 244 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . In addition, section 440.092(4), Florida Statutes (2010), provides: “An employee that is required to . . .

STEWART, v. LAKELAND FUNERAL HOME, 86 So. 3d 1205 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . Because section 440.092(2), Florida Statutes (2009), provides that an injury suffered while going to . . . Codifying what is commonly known as the “going and coming” rule, section 440.092(2) provides: An injury . . . Because Claimant was simply going to work — travel deemed personal by section 440.092(2) — there was . . . The JCC correctly ruled, pursuant to section 440.092(2), that Claimant’s injuries are not compensable . . .

JONES, v. LATEX CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,, 460 F. App'x 842 (11th Cir. 2012)

. . . . § 440.092(2) (“[a]n injury suffered while going to or coming from work is not an injury arising out . . .

E. ADAMS, II, v. MITCHELL G. HANCOCK, INC., 74 So. 3d 1113 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . We agree that the “going and coming” provision of section 440.092(2), Florida Statutes (2009), operated . . .

SENTRY INSURANCE COMPANY v. HAMLIN,, 69 So. 3d 1065 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . injuries sustained as a result of an emergency designed to save property are compensable under section 440.092 . . . coachman rule, asking this Court to construe his actions as an emergency undertaking covered under section 440.092 . . . holding was that the ownership of the property was not the determinative factor in deciding when section 440.092 . . . the action, then the statute deems the injury would “arise from work performed” because of section 440.092 . . .

HOUCK, v. TARRAGON MANAGEMENT, INC. AIG, 4 So. 3d 73 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . entitled to these benefits because she did not qualify as a “traveling employee” as provided in section 440.092 . . . employment at the time of the accident, and therefore was not a traveling employee pursuant to section 440.092 . . . Traveling Employees Section .440.092(4), Florida Statutes, concerns traveling employees and, in relevant . . .

KRAMER, v. PALM BEACH COUNTY, 978 So. 2d 836 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . The JCC found that Claimant’s injury fell within the “going or coming” rule set forth in section 440.092 . . .

CITY OF MIAMI, v. GUTIERREZ,, 979 So. 2d 1028 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . . § 440.092(1), Fla. Stat. (2003); Whitehead v. . . .

D. WILCOX, v. AG MART PRODUCE d b a St., 942 So. 2d 959 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . of Compensation Claims (JCC) denied benefits to claimant based on the going and coming rule, section 440.092 . . . for the following reasons: (1) the traveling employee exception to the going and coming rule, section 440.092 . . . own vehicle to or from work, therefore recovery of workers’ compensation benefits is barred by F.S. 440.092 . . . ANALYSIS Claimant’s first argument is that the traveling employee exception, section 440.092(4), should . . . Section 440.092(2), Florida Statutes (2005), provides: An injury suffered while going to or coming from . . .

DEUTSCH, v. HERITAGE AUTOMOTIVE ENTERPRISES,, 939 So. 2d 259 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . Section 440.092(3), Florida Statutes (2003), provides that an employee who is injured while deviating . . . However, there is nothing in Gonzalez or in the language of section 440.092(3), Florida Statutes, to . . . Nothing in section 440.092(3), Florida Statutes (2003), precludes Claimant from receiving benefits simply . . .

WHITEHEAD, v. ORANGE COUNTY SHERIFF S DEPARTMENT AIG, 909 So. 2d 344 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . These are not circumstances that justify the JCC’s denial of benefits to claimant under section 440.092 . . . It seems to me section 440.092(1) does not apply to an employee who is on duty and receiving wages in . . . In other words, the activity should not be, and cannot be, “recreation” under section 440.092(1). . . . I believe such a course comports with existing precedent and section 440.092(1). . . . To hold otherwise creates a “save me from myself’ defense to a claim under section 440.092(1). . . . Section 440.092(1), Florida Statutes (2003), provides that “[rjecreational or social activities are not . . .

IMC PHOSPHATES CO. Co. v. PRATER,, 895 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . appeal a final order of the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) finding compensable, pursuant to section 440.092 . . . C’s second issue relates to the JCC’s finding Appellee’s second accident compen-sable under section 440.092 . . . Section 440.092(5) was enacted in 1990 and re-enacted in 1991. . . . Section 440.092(5) does not define “remedial treatment.” . . . present record supports the JCC’s conclusion that Appellee’s injuries are compensable under section 440.092 . . .

ALVAREZ, v. SEM- CHI RICE PRODUCTS CORP. RSKCO., 861 So. 2d 513 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . The principle is commonly known as the “going and coming rule” and is codified in section 440.092(2), . . . However, section 440.092(3) Florida Statutes (1999), provides: An employee who is injured while deviating . . .

RAMIREZ, v. W. S. FARISH, Jr. d b a s, 855 So. 2d 1182 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . .” § 440.092(4), Fla. Stat. (2002). . . . Codifying the going and coming rule, section 440.092(2), Florida Statutes (2002), provides: “An injury . . .

RODRIGUEZ, v. TRI- STATE CARRIERS, INC., 792 So. 2d 1253 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . Moore, 143 Fla. 103, 196 So. 495, 496 (1940); see also § 440.092(3), Fla. . . . by the employee, unless the employee was engaged in a special errand or mission for the employer. § 440.092 . . . Rodriguez “engaged in a special errand or mission for the employer,” § 440.092(2), Fla. . . .

DUNLEVY, v. SEMINOLE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, 792 So. 2d 592 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . compensability was barred by horseplay and that claimant deviated from his employment under section 440.092 . . .

GILBERT, v. PUBLIX SUPERMARKETS, INC., 790 So. 2d 1057 (Fla. 2001)

. . . The “going and coming” rule, as codified in section 440.092(2), Florida Statutes (Supp.1994), provides . . . Section 440.092(2) provides: An injury suffered while going to or coming from work is not an injury arising . . . by the employee, unless the employee was engaged in a special errand or mission for the employer. § 440.092 . . .

SWARTZ, v. McDONALD S CORPORATION,, 788 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 2001)

. . . with the well-reasoned opinion of the majority on the First District and the application of section 440.092 . . . Woodville Lumber Co., 382 So.2d 802, 803 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); § 440.092(2), Fla. Stat. (1995). . . . This rule governing compensability of workers’ compensation claims is codified in section 440.092(2), . . . Because the term “dual purpose doctrine” does not appear in section 440.092, the respondents question . . . See § 440.092(2), Fla. Stat. (1995). . . . See § 440.092(4), Fla. Stat. (1995). . Swartz contends that Advanced Diagnostics v. . . .

McCORMICK, v. STATE AUDITOR GENERAL DIVISION OF RISK MANAGEMENT,, 772 So. 2d 612 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . Frist, the case involves section 440.092(2), Florida Statutes (1997), the codification of the going and . . . Also involved is the codification of the traveling employee’s rule, found in section 440.092(4), Florida . . . Section 440.092(4) applies to this case because claimant was regularly required to travel to audit sites . . .

CANFIELD, v. G. WEAVER, M. D., 768 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . We conclude that the judge misapplied the going and coming rule as codified in section 440.092(2), Florida . . . In denying the claim the judge relied on section 440.092(2), which generally indicates . that an injury . . .

FLORIDA HOSPITAL, v. GARABEDIAN,, 765 So. 2d 987 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . The going-and-coming rule, previously recognized in case law, has been codified in section 440.092(2) . . . Another provision of the statute pertinent to this case is found in section 440.092(4), Florida Statutes . . .

C. KLYSE, Jr. v. CITY OF LARGO FCCI, 765 So. 2d 270 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . The employer/carrier also defended under the coming and going rule set forth in section 440.092, Florida . . .

SWARTZ, v. McDONALD S CORPORATION, 726 So. 2d 783 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . while they are going to and coming from work, Ch. 93-415, Laws of Fla., § 6, at 78 (amending section 440.092 . . . Although section 440.092(2), Florida Statutes (1995), states broadly that an “injury suffered while going . . . benefits on the ground that her claim was barred by the operation of the going and coming rule, section 440.092 . . . The going and coming rule has been codified in section 440.092(2), Florida Statutes (1995), as follows . . .

GULBRANDSEN v. CARLTON WILBERT VAULT, INC. FCCI Co. FEISCO, 742 So. 2d 294 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . as a matter of law, have had “exclusive personal use,” as contemplated by Florida Statutes section 440.092 . . . Under section 440.092(2), Florida Statutes (1990), it is a question of fact whether the employee has . . . Section 440.092(2), Florida Statutes (1990), provides as follows: GOING OR COMING. — An injury suffered . . .

MADDEN, v. WALT DISNEY WORLD COMPANY, 711 So. 2d 150 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . See § 440.092(1), Fla. Stat. (1991); Highlands County School Board v. . . .

EVANS, v. HANDI- MAN TEMPORARY SERVICES RISCORP,, 710 So. 2d 132 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . .” § 440.092(4), Fla. Stat. (1995). . . . such travel is “travel necessarily incident to performance of the employee’s job responsibility.” § 440.092 . . . The going and coming rule, codified in section 440.092(2) Florida Statutes (1995), does not apply in . . . is engaged in “travel necessarily incident to performance of the employee’s job responsibility.” § 440.092 . . .

W. SCHOENFELDER, v. WINN JORGENSEN, P. A., 704 So. 2d 136 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . Codified at section 440.092(2), Florida Statutes (1995). . . .

L. CHIANG, M. D. v. WILDCAT GROVES, INC. PCA f k a, 703 So. 2d 1083 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . They claimed, therefore, that based on section 440.092 Kitschke’s injuries were not suffered during the . . . Section 440.092(2), styled "Going or Coming,” provides that "[a]n injury suffered while going to or coming . . .

AMERICAN AIRLINES v. LeFEVERS,, 674 So. 2d 940 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . The JCC determined that the claimant’s accident was compensable under section 440.092(4), Florida Statutes . . . not abrogate the personal comfort doctrine or the bunkhouse rule in the 1994 amendments to section 440.092 . . . determination that the claimant was actively engaged in the duties of her employment under section 440.092 . . . Chapter 93-415, Laws of Florida, effective January 1,1994, provides: 440.092 Special requirements for . . . We hold that, under the express language of the 1994 amendments to section 440.092(4), the legislature . . .

BUNNAM, v. OLSTEN QUALITY CARE, 667 So. 2d 948 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . order denying com-pensability based upon application of the “going or coming” rule contained in section 440.092 . . . the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC), in denying compensability, did not properly construe section 440.092 . . . Appellee, in contrast, urges that section 440.092(4) be read to be consistent with section 440.092(2) . . . made consistent with those set forth in Section 440.092(2). . . . Section 440.092(4), Florida Statutes (1994 Supp.) (Emphasis supplied). . . .

T. LEVINE, v. BREVARD COUNTY SHERIFF S DEPARTMENT, 658 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . .” § 440.092(2), Fla.Stat. (1991). . . .

HAGES, v. HUGHES ELECTRICAL SERVICE, INC. Co., 654 So. 2d 1280 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . We conclude that the judge improperly applied section 440.092(2), Florida Statutes (1991), and reverse . . . after work, he had not demonstrated an exception to the “going and coming” rule set forth in section 440.092 . . .

BAYFRONT MEDICAL CENTER v. HARDING,, 653 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . The E/SA defended on the basis of section 440.092(3), Florida Statutes (1991), asserting that the accident . . . applying the personal comfort doctrine, and ruled that the doctrine had not been abrogated by section 440.092 . . . /SA contend, however, that the personal comfort doctrine has been effectively eliminated by section 440.092 . . . place condoned by the employer, was not a deviation from his work within the contemplation of section 440.092 . . .

JEAN FLUET, INC. v. HARRISON,, 652 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . The E/C, by a footnote in their brief, argue the applicability of section 440.092(3), Florida Statutes . . .

PUBLIX SUPERMARKETS v. FINOCCHI,, 650 So. 2d 1122 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . We conclude that the judge properly applied section 440.092, Florida Statutes (1991), and the special . . . See also § 440.092(2), Fla.Stat. (1991). . . . support the factual findings upon which compensability was established, in accordance with section 440.092 . . .

MARMUREK, v. SUNDOWN VITAMINS, 650 So. 2d 112 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . However, given the facts of this ease, he erred when he based his decision upon only section 440.092( . . . 4), without reference to section 440.092(3), which reads: (3) DEVIATION PROM EMPLOYMENT. — An employee . . . As we read section 440.092, it was the legislature’s intent that, in factual circumstances such as those . . . and other activities reasonably required by the travel status” be determined by reference to section 440.092 . . . , with directions that the judge of compensation claims make additional findings, regarding section 440.092 . . .

U- HAUL OF SOUTH FLORIDA v. MARCH,, 645 So. 2d 581 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . The E/C contends the shoulder injury is not compen-sable under section 440.092(5), Florida Statutes ( . . .

ELECTRONIC SERVICE CLINIC v. BARNARD,, 634 So. 2d 707 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . . § 440.092(2), Fla.Stat. (1991) (emphasis added). . . .

SECUREX, INC. v. COUTO, Jr., 627 So. 2d 595 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . coming and going rule, the exception no longer applies because of a newly enacted statute, section 440.092 . . . This case presents a question of first impression regarding the extent to which section 440.092(2) has . . .

KASH- N- KARRY v. JOHNSON,, 617 So. 2d 791 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . Likewise, appellant’s contention that section 440.092(2), Florida Statutes (Supp.1990), abolished the . . . Section 440.092, Florida Statutes (Supp.1990) provides in pertinent part: 440.092 Special requirements . . .

HIGHLANDS COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD v. SAVAGE,, 609 So. 2d 133 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . game was a result of an incident of her employment and, therefore, compensable pursuant to section 440.092 . . . cover the injury sustained in the faculty basketball game was denied by the E/C pursuant to section 440.092 . . . Section 440.092(1) was created in 1990 and was in effect on December 21, 1990, the date of the claimant . . .

D. L. CULLIFER AND SON, INC. v. MARTINEZ,, 572 So. 2d 1360 (Fla. 1990)

. . . furthered by the enactment of chapter 90-201, section 14, Laws of Florida (to be codified at section 440.092 . . .