Case ID: sw2d_979/html/0506-02.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

Marilyn RAINWATER, Appellant, v. CRAWFORD & COMPANY, Respondent.
    No. 73973.
    Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.
    Oct. 27, 1998.
    Robert Stephen Flavin, Robert S. Flavin, P.C., St. Louis, for Appellant.
    David S. Ware, Christina C. Nolan, Evans & Dixon, St. Louis, for Respondent.
    Before PAUL J. SIMON, P.J., and KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff, Marilyn Rainwater, appeals from the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission’s order dismissing her appeal for failing to comply with 8 CSR 20-3.030(3)(A) in that she did not sufficiently state reasons why the Administrative Law Judge’s findings and conclusions were in error.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find that no error of law appears. As an extended opinion would have no precedential value, we affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b). A memorandum solely for the use of the parties has been provided explaining the reasons for our decision.