Sauls v. Pinnacle Entertainment, Inc.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Sauls v. Pinnacle Entertainment, Inc.

375 S.W.3d 263, 2012 WL 3668002, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1036

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided August 28, 2012·No. No. ED 97834·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Jeffrey Sauls appeals from the award of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (the Commission) denying him unemployment benefits. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the Commission’s decision is supported by sufficient competent and substantial evidence. Berwin v. Lindenwood Female College, 205 S.W.3d 291, 294 (Mo.App. E.D.2006). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the decision 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.

Jeffrey Sauls appeals from the award of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (the Commission) denying him unemployment benefits. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the Commission’s decision is supported by sufficient competent and substantial evidence. Berwin v. Lindenwood Female College, 205 S.W.3d 291, 294 (Mo.App. E.D.2006). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the decision pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).

Sauls v. Pinnacle Entertainment, Inc., 375 S.W.3d 263, 2012 WL 3668002, 2012 Mo. App. LEXIS 1036 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

375 S.W.3d 263 (Sauls v. Pinnacle Entertainment, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related