WILSON v. AE OUTFITTERS RETAIL CO., 367 S.W.3d 680 (2012)
Court: Court of Appeals of Missouri
Number: inadvmoco120917000256
Visitors: 7
Filed: Jun. 12, 2012
Latest Update: Jun. 12, 2012
Summary: ORDER PER CURIAM. Lindell Wilson appeals from the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (the Commission) denying him unemployment benefits. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the Commission's decision is supported by sufficient competent and substantial evidence. Berwin v. Lindenwood Female College, 205 S.W.3d 291 , 294 (Mo.App. E.D.2006). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided
Summary: ORDER PER CURIAM. Lindell Wilson appeals from the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (the Commission) denying him unemployment benefits. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the Commission's decision is supported by sufficient competent and substantial evidence. Berwin v. Lindenwood Female College, 205 S.W.3d 291 , 294 (Mo.App. E.D.2006). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a..
More
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Lindell Wilson appeals from the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (the Commission) denying him unemployment benefits. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the Commission's decision is supported by sufficient competent and substantial evidence. Berwin v. Lindenwood Female College, 205 S.W.3d 291, 294 (Mo.App. E.D.2006). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).
Source: Leagle
