Securities
Amanda BAILEY, Appellant, v. CLIENT SERVICES, INC., and Division of Employment Security, Respondents.
571 S.W.3d 245·Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO·2019·MO
Before Philip M. Hess, P.J., Robert G. Dowd, Jr., J. and Mary K. Hoff, J.
Brief incoming
Source-anchored Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Amanda BAILEY, Appellant,
v.
CLIENT SERVICES, INC., and Division of Employment Security, Respondents.
No. ED 107066
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.
Filed: April 9, 2019
FOR APPELLANT: Brendan D. Roediger, St. Louis University Legal Department, 100 North Tucker Boulevard, Suite 704, St. Louis, Missouri 63101.
FOR RESPONDENT: Client Services, Inc., C/O Talx UCM Services, Inc., PO Box 283, St. Louis, Missouri 63166, Todd A. Scott, Bart A. Matanic, PO Box 59, Jefferson City, Missouri 65104.
Before Philip M. Hess, P.J., Robert G. Dowd, Jr., J. and Mary K. Hoff, J.
ORDER
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM]
PER CURIAM
Amanda Bailey appeals from the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission ("Commission") denying her unemployment benefits. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the Commission's decision is supported by competent and substantial evidence in the record and no errors of law appear within the decision. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only.
We affirm the decision pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b)(4-5).