Lynam v. PREMIER CRU, LLC

Missouri Court of Appeals

Lynam v. PREMIER CRU, LLC

273 S.W.3d 585, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 36, 2009 WL 113845

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 20, 2009

DocketED 90996

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 273 S.W.3d 585 (Lynam v. PREMIER CRU, LLC) 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

Lynam v. PREMIER CRU, LLC, 273 S.W.3d 585, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 36, 2009 WL 113845 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Scott Lynam (Claimant) appeals from the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (the Commission), finding that he is not eligible for unemployment benefits because he was discharged by Premier Cru, L.L.C. (Employer) for misconduct connected with work. We affirm.

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. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for them information only, setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Scott Lynam (Claimant) appeals from the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (the Commission), finding that he is not eligible for unemployment benefits because he was discharged by Premier Cru, L.L.C. (Employer) for misconduct connected with work. We affirm.

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. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for them information only, setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

273 S.W.3d 585, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 36, 2009 WL 113845, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lynam-v-premier-cru-llc-moctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack