Palmer v. ST. ANTHONY'S MEDICAL CENTER

Missouri Court of Appeals

Palmer v. ST. ANTHONY'S MEDICAL CENTER

262 S.W.3d 678, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 1221, 2008 WL 4133940

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 9, 2008·No. ED 91092·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Claimant appeals from the final award of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirming the award of the Administrative Law Judge. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the Commission are supported by competent and substantial evidence on the whole record. A written 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 their information only, setting forth the reasons for our 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.

Claimant appeals from the final award of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirming the award of the Administrative Law Judge. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the Commission are supported by competent and substantial evidence on the whole record. A written 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 their information only, setting forth the reasons for our order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Palmer v. ST. ANTHONY'S MEDICAL CENTER, 262 S.W.3d 678, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 1221, 2008 WL 4133940 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

262 S.W.3d 678 (Palmer v. ST. ANTHONY'S MEDICAL CENTER) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.