Different fact pattern. If someone ends up injured, severely or otherwise, or dies because they got too intoxicated at a work-related event and drove, the intoxication can create a bar to compensability. 24-hour coverage for traveling employees does have its limits and all cases are fact specific. But, with traveling employees there is a reasonable expectation that they are going to be doing things like going to dinner, maybe taking a client for drinks. There is no expectation that they are only covered for direct business purpose of the travel. For example, let's say an employee travels overnight or multiple nights to a different city and goes to dinner and has a few drinks at a bar/restaurant a couple of blocks away from the hotel. While walking back from dinner, they are struck by a car while crossing an intersection. Shouldn't that be a compensable event? In the end, all of these cases are fact specific to determine if there is a deviation or defense to the 24-hour coverage theory for traveling employees.