I need questions 1-3 answered please.

CASE SUMMARY 11.3 Sisco v. Quicker Recovery, Inc., 180 P.3d 46 (Ore. Ct. App. 2008) WORKERS' COMPENSATION Sisco worked as a tow truck driver for Quicker Recov- try, a towing company in Oregon that had a contract to provide towing services for a municipal police department. The contract required Quicker to pro- vide a tow truck within 30 minutes of receiving the request for services. Sisco was dispatched to tow an impounded truck and was en route to the location when the police stopped him for speeding in the tow truck. Sisco refused to produce his driver's license or any other identification for the police and was arrested pursuant to a state statute allowing the police to arrest any traffic violator who cannot be identified suffi- ciently for purposes of issuing a citation. Sisco physi- cally resisted arrest, but he was eventually subdued by officers who used an electronic stun gun to take him into custody. The day after the arrest, Sisco com- plained of neck pain and recurring spasms caused by the altercation with the officers. He claimed that the pain prevented him from carrying out his job responsi- bilities as a tow truck driver and submitted a workers' compensation claim. lunch break. Would Sisco still be eligible for con pensation? Why or why not? 2. Would Sisco have been better served trying to antic ulate a negligence claim? Explain. 3. Doesn't public policy prevent a worker from claim ing compensation for an incident involving a criminal act? Should the court take public policy considerations into account? CASE QUESTIONS 1. Suppose Sisco's altercation occurred while he was en route to his house during an unpaid one-hour