Riggs v. NUTRITION AND CHILD SERVICES

Missouri Court of Appeals

Riggs v. NUTRITION AND CHILD SERVICES

195 S.W.3d 528, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1060, 2006 WL 1889888

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 11, 2006

DocketWD 66134

StatusPublished

This text of 195 S.W.3d 528 (Riggs v. NUTRITION AND CHILD SERVICES) 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

Riggs v. NUTRITION AND CHILD SERVICES, 195 S.W.3d 528, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1060, 2006 WL 1889888 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Order

PER CURIAM.

Yolanda Riggs appeals the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission’s (“Commission”) decision disqualifying her from receiving immediate unemployment com *529 pensation benefits on the basis that she left work voluntarily without good cause attributable to her work or employer, Nutrition and Child Services Agency (“NCSA”). In her sole point on appeal, Riggs contends that the Commission erred in affirming the Division of Employment Security Appeals referee’s decision that she voluntarily left her employment without good cause related to her work or employer because the facts found by the Commission do not support the award denying her benefits and there was insufficient competent evidence in the record to warrant such a decision by the Division, in that the undisputed evidence showed that she quit her job only after being required to perform illegal actions on the employer’s behalf and after finding replacement employment, which was reasonable.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

Order

PER CURIAM.

Yolanda Riggs appeals the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission’s (“Commission”) decision disqualifying her from receiving immediate unemployment com *529 pensation benefits on the basis that she left work voluntarily without good cause attributable to her work or employer, Nutrition and Child Services Agency (“NCSA”). In her sole point on appeal, Riggs contends that the Commission erred in affirming the Division of Employment Security Appeals referee’s decision that she voluntarily left her employment without good cause related to her work or employer because the facts found by the Commission do not support the award denying her benefits and there was insufficient competent evidence in the record to warrant such a decision by the Division, in that the undisputed evidence showed that she quit her job only after being required to perform illegal actions on the employer’s behalf and after finding replacement employment, which was reasonable.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

195 S.W.3d 528, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1060, 2006 WL 1889888, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/riggs-v-nutrition-and-child-services-moctapp-2006.