Barnes v. Department of Health & Senior Services

Missouri Court of Appeals

Barnes v. Department of Health & Senior Services

505 S.W.3d 850, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1304, 2016 WL 7387648

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 20, 2016

DocketNo. ED 103898

StatusPublished

This text of 505 S.W.3d 850 (Barnes v. Department of Health & Senior Services) 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

Barnes v. Department of Health & Senior Services, 505 S.W.3d 850, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1304, 2016 WL 7387648 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

The Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services (“Department”) appeals from the “Order and Judgment” (“Judgment”) reversing the decision of the Department to place Jacqueline K. Barnes on the Employee Disqualification List for three years. We affirm the trial court’s Judgment.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential or precedential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment 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 Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services (“Department”) appeals from the “Order and Judgment” (“Judgment”) reversing the decision of the Department to place Jacqueline K. Barnes on the Employee Disqualification List for three years. We affirm the trial court’s Judgment.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law applicable to this case would serve no jurisprudential or precedential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

505 S.W.3d 850, 2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 1304, 2016 WL 7387648, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barnes-v-department-of-health-senior-services-moctapp-2016.