Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Missouri opinions name it 1 courts 1998–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Missouri courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Walker v. Division of Employment Securitygreen1 sentence2019Further, “the employer must establish that the employee’s actions were not simply the result of poor workmanship, lack of judgment, or an inability to do the job.” Walker, 333 S.W.3d at 520 (citation omitted). 9 The Commission based its conclusion on a number of facts that it found credible, but our review of the record does not find competent and substantial evidence to support many of these findings, which are set forth below. • Employer discharged claimant on August 28, 2018, because claimant repeatedly treated her coworkers with disrespect and created conflict in the workplace in violation | 1 | 1 |
White v. Wackenhut Corp.green1 sentence2011White v. Wackenhut Corp., 208 S.W.3d 916, 918-19 (Mo.App. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Missouri. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Frisella v. Deuster Electric, Inc.
green
2 sentences2012Tenge, 333 S.W.3d at 497 ; Frisella, 269 S.W.3d at 899 . 2011Frisella, 269 S.W.3d at 899 . | 2 | 2011–2012 |
Tenge v. WASHINGTON GROUP INTERNATIONAL, INC.
green
2 sentences2012“Without evidence that an employee deliberately or purposefully violated a workplace rule, the employee cannot properly be found to have committed an act of misconduct.” Tenge, 333 S.W.3d at 497 . 2012Tenge, 333 S.W.3d at 497 ; Frisella, 269 S.W.3d at 899 . | 2 | 2012–2012 |
Shawcross v. Pyro Products, Inc.
green
2 sentences1998Id. at 344 . 1998Similarly, in Shawcross v. Pyro Prod., Inc., 916 S.W.2d 342 (Mo.App.1995), the plaintiffs alleged that they were fired in retaliation for filing complaints regarding safety problems in the workplace in violation of a federal statute which specifically prohibited employers from discharging an employee for filing such a complaint. | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.