Long v. General Motors Corporation

Missouri Court of Appeals

Long v. General Motors Corporation

284 S.W.3d 779, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 795

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 9, 2009

DocketED 92115

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 284 S.W.3d 779 (Long v. General Motors Corporation) 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

Long v. General Motors Corporation, 284 S.W.3d 779, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 795 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

General Motors Corporation appeals the Final Award of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) af-fii’ming the administrative law judge’s decision finding Judith Long permanently and totally disabled and awarding her worker’s compensation benefits and finding the Second Injury Fund had no liability-

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. The Commission’s Final Award is supported by competent and substantial evidence in the record as a whole, and no error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for the order affirming 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.

General Motors Corporation appeals the Final Award of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) af-fii’ming the administrative law judge’s decision finding Judith Long permanently and totally disabled and awarding her worker’s compensation benefits and finding the Second Injury Fund had no liability-

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal and find the claims of error to be without merit. The Commission’s Final Award is supported by competent and substantial evidence in the record as a whole, and no error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for the order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

284 S.W.3d 779, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 795, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/long-v-general-motors-corporation-moctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack