Weible v. MISSOURI BEVERAGE CO., INC.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Weible v. MISSOURI BEVERAGE CO., INC.

348 S.W.3d 829, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1244, 2011 WL 4373936

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 20, 2011

DocketED 96271

StatusPublished

This text of 348 S.W.3d 829 (Weible v. MISSOURI BEVERAGE CO., INC.) 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

Weible v. MISSOURI BEVERAGE CO., INC., 348 S.W.3d 829, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1244, 2011 WL 4373936 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Missouri Beverage Company, Inc., appeals from the final decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) reversing the award of the Appeals Tribunal, which reversed the previous award by the Division of Employment Security, finding Mischelle Weible was entitled to receive unemployment compensation. We affirm the decision of the Commission.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal, and find the claims of error to be without merit. The Commission’s decision is supported by competent and substantial evidence on the whole record. An extended opinion would have no precedential value or serve any jurisprudential purpose. 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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Missouri Beverage Company, Inc., appeals from the final decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) reversing the award of the Appeals Tribunal, which reversed the previous award by the Division of Employment Security, finding Mischelle Weible was entitled to receive unemployment compensation. We affirm the decision of the Commission.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal, and find the claims of error to be without merit. The Commission’s decision is supported by competent and substantial evidence on the whole record. An extended opinion would have no precedential value or serve any jurisprudential purpose. 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).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

348 S.W.3d 829, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1244, 2011 WL 4373936, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weible-v-missouri-beverage-co-inc-moctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack