Holden v. Director of Department of Insurance, Financial Institutions & Professional Registration

Missouri Court of Appeals

Holden v. Director of Department of Insurance, Financial Institutions & Professional Registration

470 S.W.3d 390, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 905, 2015 WL 5227938

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 8, 2015·No. WD 77955·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Michael Holden appeals the decision of the Cole County Circuit Court affirming the decision of the Administrative Hearing Commission for the Department of Insurance, Financial Institutions and Professional Registration finding cause to deny [391] his application for an insurance producer license under section 375.141.1(1) and (2), RSMo Cum. Supp. 2011. Mr. Holden argues that he did not violate any insurance laws by performing his job duties at Dakota Homestead; did not knowingly act as an insurance producer when not licensed; was exempt from licensure under section 381.115.3; did not intentionally provide materially incorrect, misleading, incomplete, or untrue information; and did not attempt to obtain a license through material misrepresentation or fraud. Because a published opinion would have no prece-dential value a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

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

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Michael Holden appeals the decision of the Cole County Circuit Court affirming the decision of the Administrative Hearing Commission for the Department of Insurance, Financial Institutions and Professional Registration finding cause to deny [391] his application for an insurance producer license under section 375.141.1(1) and (2), RSMo Cum. Supp. 2011. Mr. Holden argues that he did not violate any insurance laws by performing his job duties at Dakota Homestead; did not knowingly act as an insurance producer when not licensed; was exempt from licensure under section 381.115.3; did not intentionally provide materially incorrect, misleading, incomplete, or untrue information; and did not attempt to obtain a license through material misrepresentation or fraud. Because a published opinion would have no prece-dential value a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

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

Holden v. Director of Department of Insurance, Financial Institutions & Professional Registration, 470 S.W.3d 390, 2015 Mo. App. LEXIS 905, 2015 WL 5227938 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

470 S.W.3d 390 (Holden v. Director of Department of Insurance, Financial Institutions & Professional Registration) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related