Petitioner, George Terebush ("Petitioner"), was employed by Creative Safety Products ("Creative") as a magician and puppeteer.  Petitioner resided in Avenel, New Jersey, and traveled from his home to various schools in New Jersey where he would perform programs.  Petitioner received his assignments from Creative by mail and was paid an annual salary.  He traveled to the respective schools in a Plymouth wagon ("vehicle")  which was owned by Creative; he did not use this vehicle for personal use.  Petitioner tracked the  mileage on the vehicle on a daily basis, and reported his calculations to Creative.  The insurance on the vehicle, fuel, tolls and parking were paid for by Creative.   On October 2, 2001, Petitioner performed programs at schools located approximately forty (40) miles from Petitioner's home.  On this date, he was involved in a motor vehicle accident on the way home from Flemington to Avenel.  As a result, Petitioner filed a Claim Petition for workers' compensation benefits.  This claim was denied by the Respondent as a non-compensable claim based on the "premises" rule codified at N.J.S.A. 34:15-36. 

                The Supreme Court has  interpreted the statutory  language in N.J.S.A. 34:15-36  as generally "not allowing compensation for accidents occurring in areas outside of the employer's control, as when the employee is going to and coming from work." Zelasko v. Refrigerated Food Express, 128 N.J. 329, 336 (1992).  However, the Court has interpreted the statute as encompassing a "travel time" exception that allows portal to portal coverage for employees who (1) are paid for travel time to and from a distant job site; or (2) using an employer-authorized vehicle for travel time to and from a distant job site. Id.

                Based on the aforementioned facts, the Appellate Division affirmed the decision of the Workers' Compensation Judge, finding that a job site forty (40) miles from Petitioner's home was not "distant" within the meaning of the statute.  Further, they distinguished this factual scenario from those compensable cases where a Petitioner drives to various worksites and is specifically compensated for that travel time.