From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Young v. Div. of Emp't Sec.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Oct 28, 2014
444 S.W.3d 491 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014)

Opinion

Nos. WD 76691 WD 76692 WD 76693.

2014-10-28

Kimberly YOUNG, Appellant, v. DIVISION OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, Respondent.

Appeal from the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission. Kimberly Young, Appellant Pro-se. Sara H. Harrison, for Respondent.


Appeal from the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission.


Kimberly Young, Appellant Pro-se. Sara H. Harrison, for Respondent.
Before Division Two: VICTOR C. HOWARD, Presiding Judge, JAMES E. WELSH, Judge and ANTHONY REX GABBERT, Judge.

ORDER


PER CURIAM:

Kimberly Young appeals the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (“Commission”) affirming the Division of Employment Security Appeals Tribunal's (“Appeals Tribunal”) decision to deny her unemployment benefits. In her sole point on appeal, Ms. Young claims that the Commission erred in affirming the decision of the Appeals Tribunal because her claim “was a EUC08 and not a regular UI claim[,]” and “[t]he Tribunal did not give a pamphlet concerning this hearing[,] ... [t]he Agency failed to give a written notice [that] the appellant could fully understand[,] ... gave no appeals information in its determination[, and] ... failed to give a notice every week for the ineligibility[.]” Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).


Summaries of

Young v. Div. of Emp't Sec.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.
Oct 28, 2014
444 S.W.3d 491 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014)
Case details for

Young v. Div. of Emp't Sec.

Case Details

Full title:Kimberly YOUNG, Appellant, v. DIVISION OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, Respondent.

Court:Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Date published: Oct 28, 2014

Citations

444 S.W.3d 491 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014)