287.450. Failure to agree on compensation — division to hold hearings. — If the employer and employee or his dependents do not agree in regard to compensation payable under this chapter, either party may make application in a manner determined by the division for a hearing in regard to the matters at issue and for a ruling thereon, except that no application for a hearing shall be considered until fourteen days after the receipt by the division of the report of accident required under section 287.380. The fourteen-day waiting period is not applicable to applications for hardship hearings. After the application has been received, the division shall set a date for a hearing, which shall be held as soon as practicable, and shall notify the interested parties of the time and place of the hearing.
Notes of Decisions
Greer v. SYSCO Food Servs., 475 S.W.3d 655 (Mo. 2015).
· cites it 2× “See section 287.450 (providing if the employer and employee cannot agree on compensation payable under chapter 287, either party may file an application for a hearing on the matters at issue and request a ruling thereon).”
Goodrum v. Asplundh Tree Expert Co., 824 S.W.2d 6 (Mo. 1992).
· cites it 2× “If the employer and employee cannot agree on the compensation payable under the Act, either party may apply for a hearing before an administrative law judge, §§ 287.450, 287.460, RSMo 1986, and following an award, either may seek review by the Labor and Industrial Relations…”
Weston Transp., Inc. v. Sharp, 926 S.W.2d 219 (Mo. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 8× “Weston Transportation claims the award was not supported by competent and substantial evidence because employer failed to receive proper notice of the hearing as required by section 287.450 RSMo 1987 and as provided by section 287.”
Felts v. Ford Motor Co., 916 S.W.2d 798 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 2× “480 examines the procedure associated with an application for review.”
Maryland Cas. Co. v. Gen. Elec. Co., 418 S.W.2d 115 (Mo. 1967).
· cites it 2× “Perhaps agreements for distribution of the proceeds of common-law actions could be reviewed as to their fairness by the Workmen's Compensation Commission along the lines now provided by § 287.450 regarding compensation payable under the act.”
Arledge v. Progressive Tire Distrib., 924 S.W.2d 506 (Mo. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 4× “” Mo.Rev.Stat. § 287.450 (Cum.Supp.1993). A hearing on the issue of dependency of Elizabeth Ann Arledge was scheduled for June 27,1995, and canceled on the basis that the matter was premature.”
Lutes v. Schaefer, 431 S.W.3d 550 (Mo. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 2× “3d at 133 (citing Section 287.450). Such a determination is performed by administrative law judges, a statutorily-created employee.”
Trammell v. S & K Indus., Inc., 784 S.W.2d 209 (Mo. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 3× “-400, RSMo 1986; section 287.450, RSMo 1986; section 287.460, RSMo 1986; Mo.”
Sims v. Bestway Cleaning Co., 701 S.W.2d 791 (Mo. Ct. App. 1985).
· cites it 3× “” On appeal to this court Bestway contends this finding is unsupported by substantial evidence and, in the absence of affirmative proof of notice to the employer, the Commission was without jurisdiction to enter an award.”
Parker v. City of Kirkwood, 605 S.W.2d 210 (Mo. Ct. App. 1980).
“2 On appeal, claimant contends that the circuit court erred in its ruling because, as a result of the Commission’s failure to supply the entire file, there was no evidence before the court that the Division had sent claimant notice of the scheduled hearings, as required by…”
Woodruff v. Tourville Quarry, Inc., 381 S.W.2d 14 (Mo. Ct. App. 1964).
“” § 287.450, supra, requires the commission to notify interested parties of the time and place of hearings.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.