Spencer v. Macy's Credit Operations, Inc.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Spencer v. Macy's Credit Operations, Inc.

515 S.W.3d 839, 2017 WL 1323911, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 283

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided April 11, 2017·No. No. ED 104159·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

Barbara Spencer appeals from the order of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (“Commission”) denying her claim for unemployment benefits after her termination from Mary’s Credit Operations, Inc. because of misconduct connected with work. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. The evidence in support of the Commission’s order was not insufficient. No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the Commission’s order 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

Barbara Spencer appeals from the order of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (“Commission”) denying her claim for unemployment benefits after her termination from Mary’s Credit Operations, Inc. because of misconduct connected with work. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal. The evidence in support of the Commission’s order was not insufficient. No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum opinion for the use of the parties only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the Commission’s order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Spencer v. Macy's Credit Operations, Inc., 515 S.W.3d 839, 2017 WL 1323911, 2017 Mo. App. LEXIS 283 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

515 S.W.3d 839 (Spencer v. Macy's Credit Operations, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.