Page v. Clark Refining & Marketing, Inc.

996 S.W.2d 678, 1999 Mo. App. LEXIS 690
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedMay 18, 1999
DocketNo. 75104
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 996 S.W.2d 678 (Page v. Clark Refining & Marketing, Inc.) 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
Page v. Clark Refining & Marketing, Inc., 996 S.W.2d 678, 1999 Mo. App. LEXIS 690 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999).

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Dorothy Page appeals from the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission’s order dismissing her application for review for failing to comply with 8 CSR 20-3.030(3)(A) in that she did not sufficiently state reasons why the Administrative Law Judge’s findings and conclusions were in [679]*679error. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The judgment is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

Related

Page v. Clark Refining & Marketing, Inc.
3 S.W.3d 385 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
996 S.W.2d 678, 1999 Mo. App. LEXIS 690, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/page-v-clark-refining-marketing-inc-moctapp-1999.