Taylor v. Taylor Bros. Home Builders

Missouri Court of Appeals

Taylor v. Taylor Bros. Home Builders

959 S.W.2d 887, 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 2099, 1997 WL 755309

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 9, 1997

DocketNo. 72103

StatusPublished

This text of 959 S.W.2d 887 (Taylor v. Taylor Bros. Home Builders) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Taylor v. Taylor Bros. Home Builders, 959 S.W.2d 887, 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 2099, 1997 WL 755309 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Ron E. Taylor (Employee) appeals the judgment of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission denying his claim for permanent and total disability benefits from Taylor Brothers Home Builders (Employer) and awarding him only compensation for permanent and partial disability benefits. We review the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission to determine whether the findings are authorized by the law and supported by competent and substantial evidence on the whole record, consid[888]*888ering the evidence in the light most favorable to the decision. Sitzes v. Sitzes Repair Service & Towing, 898 S.W.2d 95, 97 (Mo.App.1994); Section 287.490, RSMo 1994.

We have reviewed the record on appeal and the briefs of the parties and find the decision was supported by competent and substantial evidence and no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. 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.

Ron E. Taylor (Employee) appeals the judgment of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission denying his claim for permanent and total disability benefits from Taylor Brothers Home Builders (Employer) and awarding him only compensation for permanent and partial disability benefits. We review the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission to determine whether the findings are authorized by the law and supported by competent and substantial evidence on the whole record, consid[888]*888ering the evidence in the light most favorable to the decision. Sitzes v. Sitzes Repair Service & Towing, 898 S.W.2d 95, 97 (Mo.App.1994); Section 287.490, RSMo 1994.

We have reviewed the record on appeal and the briefs of the parties and find the decision was supported by competent and substantial evidence and no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

959 S.W.2d 887, 1997 Mo. App. LEXIS 2099, 1997 WL 755309, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-taylor-bros-home-builders-moctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack