Case ID: sw3d_534/html/0306-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Mita BISWAS, Claimant/Appellant, v. DIVISION OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, Respondent/Respondent.
    No. ED 105037
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE.
    Filed: September 12, 2017
    Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied October 23, 2017
    Application of Transfer Denied December 19, 2017
    Mita Biswas, Acting Pro Se, P.O. Box 460353, St. Louis, MO 63146, For Claimant/Appellant.
    Ninion S. Riley, P.O. Box 3100, Jefferson City, MO 65102, For Respondent/Respondent.
    Before Robert G. Dowd, Jr., P.J., Sherri B. Sullivan, J., and Kurt S. Odenwald, J.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Mita Biswas (Claimant) appeals from the decision of the Labor.and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) finding her “second quarter 2014 wages are not properly includible in her base period” because the law excludes the most recent completed calendar quarter wages from the benefit calculation. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the Commission properly excluded Claimant’s second quarter 2014 wages in her base period wages in determining her benefits award and the Commission’s decision is supported by sufficient competent and substantial evidence. Welsh v. Mentor Management, Inc., 357 S.W.3d 277, 280 (Mo. App. E.D. 2012). An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have, however, 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).