Case Name: Charlie HILL, Employee/Appellant, v. PARKWAY SCHOOL DISTRICT, Employer/Respondent, and Division of Employment Security, Respondent/Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 2012-12-18
Citations: 388 S.W.3d 601
Docket Number: No. ED 98542
Parties: Charlie HILL, Employee/Appellant, v. PARKWAY SCHOOL DISTRICT, Employer/Respondent, and Division of Employment Security, Respondent/Respondent.
Judges: Before CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, P.J., GLENN A. NORTON, J., and SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Third Series
Volume: 388
Pages: 601–602

Head Matter:
Charlie HILL, Employee/Appellant, v. PARKWAY SCHOOL DISTRICT, Employer/Respondent, and Division of Employment Security, Respondent/Respondent.
No. ED 98542.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.
Dec. 18, 2012.
John J. Ammann, St. Louis, MO, for Employee/Appellant.
Parkway School District, Chesterfield, MO, Pro Se.
Michael Eugene Cook Pritchett, Jefferson City, MO, for Respondent/Respondent.
Before CLIFFORD H. AHRENS, P.J., GLENN A. NORTON, J., and SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Charlie Hill appeals from the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (the Commission) denying him unemployment benefits. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the Commission's decision is supported by substantial and competent evidence. Berwin v. Lindenwood Female College, 205 S.W.3d 291, 294 (Mo.App. E.D.2006). 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).