Sakic v. Centaur Building Services

Missouri Court of Appeals

Sakic v. Centaur Building Services

341 S.W.3d 130, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 585, 2011 WL 1532031

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 19, 2011·No. ED 95610, ED 95618·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Claimant, Edin Sakic, appeals from two decisions by the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission that dismissed claimant’s applications for review from two awards by an administrative law judge. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision. The decisions are affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Claimant, Edin Sakic, appeals from two decisions by the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission that dismissed claimant’s applications for review from two awards by an administrative law judge. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. The parties have been provided with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this decision. The decisions are affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).

Sakic v. Centaur Building Services, 341 S.W.3d 130, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 585, 2011 WL 1532031 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

341 S.W.3d 130 (Sakic v. Centaur Building Services) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.