Case Name: STATE of Missouri, ex rel. MISSOURI HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, Appellant, v. LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION In Re: Matter of William Tyrone Smith, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1986-03-18
Citations: 706 S.W.2d 609
Docket Number: No. 50111
Parties: STATE of Missouri, ex rel. MISSOURI HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, Appellant, v. LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION In Re: Matter of William Tyrone Smith, Respondent.
Judges: CARL R. GAERTNER, P.J., and SNYDER, J., concur.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 706
Pages: 609–610

Head Matter:
STATE of Missouri, ex rel. MISSOURI HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, Appellant, v. LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION In Re: Matter of William Tyrone Smith, Respondent.
No. 50111.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
March 18, 1986.
Tracy A. Hunsaker, Kirkwood, for appellant.
Alan J. Downs, Jefferson City, for respondent.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
SMITH, Judge.
The Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission appeals from the dismissal of its petition for review of a decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission. Dismissal was based upon the failure of appellant to join as a party the Division of Employment Security as mandated by the then operative statute, Sec. 288.210 RSMo 1978.
Our review establishes that appellant made no substantial compliance with the statute and the petition for review was properly dismissed. Duzer v. Industrial Commission, 402 S.W.2d 616 (Mo.App.1966) [1, 2]; Schiff v. Labor and Industrial Commission, 684 S.W.2d 924 (Mo.App. 1985). Merely alleging that the Division entered a decision "unsupported by competent and substantial evidence" in the body of the petition for review, but omitting any reference to the Division in the caption or the prayer is not sufficient to make the Division a party.
In view of the amendment to the law after dismissal of this case a full opinion would have no precedential value.
Judgment affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.-16(b).
CARL R. GAERTNER, P.J., and SNYDER, J., concur.