Stewart v. Southwestern Bell Telephone

Missouri Court of Appeals

Stewart v. Southwestern Bell Telephone

451 S.W.3d 300, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 1314, 2014 WL 6682340

Missouri Court of Appeals·Decided November 25, 2014·No. No. ED 101366 and ED 101323·Published

Opinion

[301] ORDER

PER CURIAM

Employee Antoinne Stewart appeals the order of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (“Commission”) determining that he is ineligible for employment benefits. We affirm the Commission’s order.

No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

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

[301] ORDER

PER CURIAM

Employee Antoinne Stewart appeals the order of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (“Commission”) determining that he is ineligible for employment benefits. We affirm the Commission’s order.

No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Stewart v. Southwestern Bell Telephone, 451 S.W.3d 300, 2014 Mo. App. LEXIS 1314, 2014 WL 6682340 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

451 S.W.3d 300 (Stewart v. Southwestern Bell Telephone) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.