# Midstate Oil Co. v. Missouri Commission on Human Rights

> Supreme Court of Missouri · September 11, 1984 · 679 S.W.2d 842

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9776236

## Case

- **Full name:** MIDSTATE OIL COMPANY, INC., Respondent, v. MISSOURI COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, Et Al., Appellants
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Missouri
- **Decided:** September 11, 1984
- **Citations:** 679 S.W.2d 842; 61 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1725; 1984 Mo. LEXIS 269
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** On rehearing by Blackmar
- **Judges:** Welliver, Higgins, Billings, Donnelly, Blackmar, Rendlen, Gunn
- **Cited by:** 75 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9776236

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding elements of an employment sex discrimination claim under section 213.055 are: "that complainant [ (1) ] was a member of a class protected by § 296.020.1; [ (2) ] that she was discharged; and [ (3
- holding state law disparate- treatment claims should be evaluated under burden-shifting analysis of McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973)
- holding state law disparate-treatment claims should be evaluated under burden-shifting analysis of McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973)
- holding disparate treatment claims should be evaluated using the McDonnell Douglas framework

## Opinion text

SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
BLACKMAR, District Judge.
It is inconceivable to me that the Court would allow its opinion to stand in the face of Hansome v. Northwestern Cooperage Company, No. 65865, decided today. I had always assumed that the Missouri Commission on Human Rights had authority, similar to the authority possessed by a jury, to determine questions of credibility. The Court’s opinion reversed a decision of the Commission by giving conclusive effect to controverted evidence, while ignoring the claimant’s evidence.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9776236. Public record. Not legal advice.