Shealey v. Ameristar Casino St. Charles, Inc.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Shealey v. Ameristar Casino St. Charles, Inc.

310 S.W.3d 777, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 672, 2010 WL 1978205

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided May 18, 2010·No. ED 93810·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Dorothy Shealey appeals pro se from the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission’s decision finding that she was disqualified for unemployment compensation benefits because she was discharged for misconduct connected with her work.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, which sets forth the facts and reasons for this order.

We affirm 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.

Dorothy Shealey appeals pro se from the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission’s decision finding that she was disqualified for unemployment compensation benefits because she was discharged for misconduct connected with her work.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, which sets forth the facts and reasons for this order.

We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Shealey v. Ameristar Casino St. Charles, Inc., 310 S.W.3d 777, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 672, 2010 WL 1978205 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

310 S.W.3d 777 (Shealey v. Ameristar Casino St. Charles, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related