Gaedig v. Global Environmental Laboratories

Missouri Court of Appeals

Gaedig v. Global Environmental Laboratories

180 S.W.3d 512, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1940, 2005 WL 3527619

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 27, 2005

DocketED 86183

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 180 S.W.3d 512 (Gaedig v. Global Environmental Laboratories) 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

Gaedig v. Global Environmental Laboratories, 180 S.W.3d 512, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1940, 2005 WL 3527619 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

The claimant, Diana B. Gaedig, appeals from the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission finding her disqualified from receiving unemployment compensation benefits. The Commission found the claimant voluntarily separated from her employer without good cause attributable to her work or employer. We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal. The decision of the Commission is supported by competent and substantial -evidence on the whole record. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties, however, have been furnished with a memorandum, for their information only, set *513 ting forth the reasons for this order. The Commission’s decision is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b)(4).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

The claimant, Diana B. Gaedig, appeals from the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission finding her disqualified from receiving unemployment compensation benefits. The Commission found the claimant voluntarily separated from her employer without good cause attributable to her work or employer. We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal. The decision of the Commission is supported by competent and substantial -evidence on the whole record. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties, however, have been furnished with a memorandum, for their information only, set *513 ting forth the reasons for this order. The Commission’s decision is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b)(4).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

180 S.W.3d 512, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1940, 2005 WL 3527619, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gaedig-v-global-environmental-laboratories-moctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack