Banks v. Treasurer of Missouri

Missouri Court of Appeals

Banks v. Treasurer of Missouri

99 S.W.3d 61, 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 234, 2003 WL 437193

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedFebruary 25, 2003

DocketNo. ED 81165

StatusPublished

This text of 99 S.W.3d 61 (Banks v. Treasurer of Missouri) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Banks v. Treasurer of Missouri, 99 S.W.3d 61, 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 234, 2003 WL 437193 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

The Treasurer of the State of Missouri, as custodian of the Second Injury Fund (hereinafter, “SIF”) appeals the judgment of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (hereinafter, “the Commission”) declaring Charline Banks (hereinafter, “Claimant”) permanently and totally disabled. SIF contends that the Commission erred in awarding permanent and total disability benefits because: (1) Claimant did not prove she had a preexisting injury by failing to offer competent evidence, and (2) SIF is not responsible for a subsequent deterioration of an unrelated preexisting disability.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the Commission’s decision is supported by competent and substantial evidence and is not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. Reese v. Gary & Roger Link, Inc., 5 S.W.3d 522, 525 (Mo.App. E.D.1999). An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. However, we have provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

The Treasurer of the State of Missouri, as custodian of the Second Injury Fund (hereinafter, “SIF”) appeals the judgment of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (hereinafter, “the Commission”) declaring Charline Banks (hereinafter, “Claimant”) permanently and totally disabled. SIF contends that the Commission erred in awarding permanent and total disability benefits because: (1) Claimant did not prove she had a preexisting injury by failing to offer competent evidence, and (2) SIF is not responsible for a subsequent deterioration of an unrelated preexisting disability.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the Commission’s decision is supported by competent and substantial evidence and is not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. Reese v. Gary & Roger Link, Inc., 5 S.W.3d 522, 525 (Mo.App. E.D.1999). An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. However, we have provided a memorandum opinion only for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision.

The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

99 S.W.3d 61, 2003 Mo. App. LEXIS 234, 2003 WL 437193, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/banks-v-treasurer-of-missouri-moctapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack