Blanton v. Department of Social Services

Missouri Court of Appeals

Blanton v. Department of Social Services

350 S.W.3d 853, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1350, 2011 WL 4940792

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 18, 2011

DocketED 95889

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 350 S.W.3d 853 (Blanton v. Department of Social 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

Blanton v. Department of Social Services, 350 S.W.3d 853, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1350, 2011 WL 4940792 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Tameka Blanton (Employee) appeals from a decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) denying her unemployment benefits based on its finding that Employee voluntarily left her work without good cause attributable to her work or the employer. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the Commission’s decision is supported by competent and substantial evidence. Section 288.210 RSMo 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).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Tameka Blanton (Employee) appeals from a decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) denying her unemployment benefits based on its finding that Employee voluntarily left her work without good cause attributable to her work or the employer. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the Commission’s decision is supported by competent and substantial evidence. Section 288.210 RSMo 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).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

350 S.W.3d 853, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1350, 2011 WL 4940792, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blanton-v-department-of-social-services-moctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack