Logan v. AT & T OPERATIONS, INC.

307 S.W.3d 186, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 361, 2010 WL 1049172
Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided March 23, 2010·No. ED 93323·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Lanobie Logan (hereinafter, “the Claimant”) appeals from the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (hereinafter, “the Commission”), denying her unemployment compensation benefits. Claimant raises two issues on appeal. First, Claimant alleges she had good cause to file a late appeal of the deputy’s determination because she was suffering from pregnancy complications, was placed on bed rest, and acted in a reasonable manner by attempting to fax her appeal to the Commission within the time limit. Second, Claimant asserts she did not voluntarily quit her job because she was suffering from pregnancy complications and was physically unable to return to work.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and transcript on appeal. The Commission’s decision is supported by competent substantial evidence and authorized by law. Korkutovic v. Gamel Co., 284 S.W.3d 653, 656 (Mo.App. E.D.2009). An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. The Commission’s decision is affirmed pursuant to rule 84.16(b).

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

Logan v. AT & T OPERATIONS, INC., 307 S.W.3d 186, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 361, 2010 WL 1049172 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

307 S.W.3d 186 (Logan v. AT & T OPERATIONS, INC.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Willis v. Board of Education of City of St. Louis
307 S.W.3d 186 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2010)