Opinion

Brown v. City of St. Louis

  • 879 S.W.2d 651
  • 1994 Mo. App. LEXIS 786
  • 1994 WL 187035
Court
Missouri Court of Appeals
Filed
May 17, 1994
Status
Published
On the bench
Ahrens, Gaertner, Grimm
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 21.1%

The opinion

PER CURIAM.

Claimant appeals pro se from the denial of his workers’ compensation claim. We affirm.

Claimant’s brief does not comply with Rule 84.04. As stated in a previous workers’ compensation case appealed by this claimant, claimant filed “an incomprehensible brief.” Brown v. City of St. Louis, 842 S.W.2d 163, 165 (Mo.App.E.D.1992). We would be justified in dismissing his appeal for this failure. Nevertheless, we elected to review his claims and find that none have merit.

The decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission is supported by competent and substantial evidence on the whole record. No error of law appears. An opinion would have no precedential value. Rule 84.16(b).

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.