Shargel v. Daimler Chrysler Corp.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Shargel v. Daimler Chrysler Corp.

202 S.W.3d 710, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1387, 2006 WL 2671352

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided September 19, 2006·No. Nos. ED 87757, ED 87763·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. No error of law appears, and an extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished, for their information only, with a memorandum 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. No error of law appears, and an extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished, for their information only, with a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Shargel v. Daimler Chrysler Corp., 202 S.W.3d 710, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 1387, 2006 WL 2671352 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

202 S.W.3d 710 (Shargel v. Daimler Chrysler Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.