Frye v. Speedway Chevrolet Cadillac

315 S.W.3d 786, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1025, 2010 WL 3118593
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided August 10, 2010·No. WD 71756·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Speedway Chevrolet Cadillac, Inc. (“Speedway”), Daniel F. Ladd (“Ladd”), the President of Speedway, and Brice Ack-erman (“Ackerman”), the General Sales Manager of Speedway, (collectively the “Defendants”) appeal from the trial court’s order denying Defendants’ motion to compel arbitration of Larry Frye’s employment related claims. The Defendants contend that a program adopted by Speedway after Larry Frye began employment with Speedway and is a legally enforceable contract. We affirm the trial court’s denial of Defendants’ motion to compel arbitration. 84.16(b). 1

1

. This Order has been issued contemporaneously with this Court’s Opinion in Kimberly Frye v. Speedway Chevrolet Cadillac, WD 71757. Mr. Frye’s motion for consolidation of this case with the aforesaid case was taken with the case and is denied.

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

Frye v. Speedway Chevrolet Cadillac, 315 S.W.3d 786, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1025, 2010 WL 3118593 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

315 S.W.3d 786 (Frye v. Speedway Chevrolet Cadillac) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sloan v. Director of Revenue
315 S.W.3d 786 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2010)
Frye v. Speedway Chevrolet Cadillac
321 S.W.3d 429 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2010)