Case Name: Marcia J. GARLAND, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. AFT ST. LOUIS LOCAL 420, Defendant/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2016-04-05
Citations: 485 S.W.3d 779
Docket Number: No. ED 103187
Parties: Marcia J. GARLAND, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. AFT ST. LOUIS LOCAL 420, Defendant/Respondent.
Judges: Before Lisa S. Van Amburg, C.J., Lawrence E. Mooney, J., and Sherri B. Sullivan, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 485
Pages: 779–780

Head Matter:
Marcia J. GARLAND, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. AFT ST. LOUIS LOCAL 420, Defendant/Respondent.
No. ED 103187
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION FIVE.
Filed: April 5, 2016
Douglas B. Ponder, Jaclyn M. Zimmerman, 20 S. Sarah Street, St. Louis, MO 63108, for Plaintiff/Appellant.
George O. Suggs, 1221 Locust Street, 2nd Floor, St. Louis, MO 63103, for Defendant/Respondent.
Before Lisa S. Van Amburg, C.J., Lawrence E. Mooney, J., and Sherri B. Sullivan, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Marcia J. Garland (Appellant) appeals from the trial court's judgment in favor of AFT St. Louis Local 420 on Appellant's Petition alleging discrimination under the Missouri Human Rights Act. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude the trial court did not err in refusing to submit Appellant's proffered verdict director as it amounted to an impermissible roving commission. Klotz v. St. Anthony's Med. Ctr., 311 S.W.3d 752, 766 (Mo.2010), as modified (May 25, 2010). An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).