Case Name: William BRAY, Respondent, v. CENTIMARK CORPORATION, Appellant.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2018-10-30
Citations: 560 S.W.3d 622
Docket Number: No. ED 106361
Parties: William BRAY, Respondent,
v.
CENTIMARK CORPORATION, Appellant.
Judges: Before Philip M. Hess, P.J. and Robert G. Dowd, Jr. and Mary K. Hoff, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 560
Pages: 622–622

Head Matter:
William BRAY, Respondent,
v.
CENTIMARK CORPORATION, Appellant.
No. ED 106361
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION TWO.
Filed: October 30, 2018
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: Kevin H. Dunaway, 1949 E. Sunshine, Suite 1-130, Springfield, MO 65804.
ATTORNEYS FOR RESPONDENT: James J. Sievers, Jr., 8131 Manchester Road, Brentwood, MO 63144.
Before Philip M. Hess, P.J. and Robert G. Dowd, Jr. and Mary K. Hoff, JJ.
ORDER

Opinion:
CentiMark Corporation ("Employer") appeals from an order of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission ("Commission") denying its motion under Section 287.470 to review the permanent and total disability award that the Commission previously entered in favor of William Bray ("Employee"), its former employee. We affirm.
An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).