Hutchins v. BELLEFONTAINE HABILITATION CENTER

Missouri Court of Appeals

Hutchins v. BELLEFONTAINE HABILITATION CENTER

180 S.W.3d 82, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1941, 2005 WL 3526572

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 27, 2005

DocketED 86271

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 180 S.W.3d 82 (Hutchins v. BELLEFONTAINE HABILITATION CENTER) 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

Hutchins v. BELLEFONTAINE HABILITATION CENTER, 180 S.W.3d 82, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1941, 2005 WL 3526572 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Scharad T. Hutchins (hereinafter, “Hutchins”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment affirming the decision of the *83 Missouri Personnel Advisory Board (“the Board”), which affirmed Hutchins’ dismissal from his employer Bellefontaine Habili-tation Center. Hutchins raises two points on appeal, claiming the Board’s decision was: (1) arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable because its inferences from the evidence are contrary to the undisputed facts; and (2) unsupported by competent and substantial evidence and is contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence when viewed in light of the entire record.

We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal. No error of law appears. A written opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, prepared a memorandum for the use of the parties only, 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.

Scharad T. Hutchins (hereinafter, “Hutchins”) appeals from the trial court’s judgment affirming the decision of the *83 Missouri Personnel Advisory Board (“the Board”), which affirmed Hutchins’ dismissal from his employer Bellefontaine Habili-tation Center. Hutchins raises two points on appeal, claiming the Board’s decision was: (1) arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable because its inferences from the evidence are contrary to the undisputed facts; and (2) unsupported by competent and substantial evidence and is contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence when viewed in light of the entire record.

We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal. No error of law appears. A written opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, prepared a memorandum for the use of the parties only, setting forth the reasons for our decision.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

180 S.W.3d 82, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 1941, 2005 WL 3526572, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hutchins-v-bellefontaine-habilitation-center-moctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack