Case Name: Diane MELCHING, Claimant/Appellant, v. SUNLINE BRANDS, Employer/Respondent, and Federal Insurance Company, Insurer/Respondent, and Treasurer of the State of Missouri, as Custodian of the Second Injury Fund, Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1997-02-18
Citations: 938 S.W.2d 662
Docket Number: No. 70662
Parties: Diane MELCHING, Claimant/Appellant, v. SUNLINE BRANDS, Employer/Respondent, and Federal Insurance Company, Insurer/Respondent, and Treasurer of the State of Missouri, as Custodian of the Second Injury Fund, Respondent.
Judges: Before CRANE, P.J., and GERALD M. SMITH and PUDLOWSKI, JJ.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 938
Pages: 662–663

Head Matter:
Diane MELCHING, Claimant/Appellant, v. SUNLINE BRANDS, Employer/Respondent, and Federal Insurance Company, Insurer/Respondent, and Treasurer of the State of Missouri, as Custodian of the Second Injury Fund, Respondent.
No. 70662.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.
Feb. 18, 1997.
Harry J. Nichols, St. Louis, for appellant.
Betsy J. Levitt, Evans & Dixon, St. Louis, for respondents Sunline Brands and Federal Ins. Co.
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, Woodie J. Curtis, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., St. Louis, for Second Injury Fund.
Before CRANE, P.J., and GERALD M. SMITH and PUDLOWSKI, JJ.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Claimant appeals from the final award of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commis sion affirming the award of the Administrative Law Judge. We affirm. The findings and conclusions of the Commission are not clearly erroneous, and an extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for our order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).