Missouri Revised Statutes
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 287.808 (2026)
Burden of proof
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
287.808. Burden of proof. — The burden of establishing any affirmative defense is on the employer. The burden of proving an entitlement to compensation under this chapter is on the employee or dependent. In asserting any claim or defense based on a factual proposition, the party asserting such claim or defense must establish that such proposition is more likely to be true than not true.
--------
(L. 2005 S.B. 1 & 130)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2009–2022 · leading case: Poarch v. Treasurer of Missouri-Custodian of the Second Injury Fund, 365 S.W.3d 638 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).
Poarch v. Treasurer of Missouri-Custodian of the Second Injury Fund, 365 S.W.3d 638 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012). “Poarch contends that the language of section 287.808, RSMo Cum.Supp.2011, supports his argument.”
Miller v. Missouri High. & Transp. Comm'n, 287 S.W.3d 671 (Mo. 2009). “§ 287.808. The commission adopted the ALJ's decision.”
Glasco v. Treasurer of the State-Custodian of the Second Injury Fund, 534 S.W.3d 391 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017). “See § 287.808. This claim (to the extent that we understand it) is wholly without merit.”
Elsworth v. Wayne Cnty., 547 S.W.3d 599 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018). “pensation and death benefit provided for herein shall be reduced at least twenty-five but not more than fifty percent; provided, that it is shown that the employee had actual knowledge of the *602 rule so adopted by the employer; and provided, further, that the employer had,…”
Thompson v. ICI Am. Holding, 347 S.W.3d 624 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011). “” § 287.808. *630 I. Thompson first challenges the Commission’s conclusion that his failure to obey the Lock-Out Rules caused his injury.”
Carver v. Delta Innovative Servs., 379 S.W.3d 865 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012). “” § 287.808. With respect to claimed safety-rule violations, the employer must establish the following elements to satisfy its burden under § 287.”
Porter v. RPCS, Inc., 402 S.W.3d 161 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013). “3d at 509 ; § 287.808. Porter’s burden of proof includes establishing the injury arose out of and in the course of her employment; i.”
James C. Bowman v. Cent. Missouri Aviation, Inc., & Treasurer of the State of Missouri as Custodian for the Second Injury Fund, 497 S.W.3d 312 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016). “” § 287.808. “An injury by accident[ 4 ] is com-pensable only if the accident was the prevailing factor in causing both the resulting medical condition and disability.”
Aramark Educ. Servs., Inc. v. Faulkner, 408 S.W.3d 271 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013). “2 Generally, pursuant to Section 287.808, the employer has the burden of establishing any affirmative defense, which includes statutory notice of injury under Section 288.”
Mary Kay Hazeltine v. State of Missouri, Second Injury Fund (Mo. Ct. App. 2019). “Instead, she argues the “more likely 18 to be true than not true,” or preponderance, standard set forth in § 287.808 applies.9 Substantively, Claimant argues the Commission erred in finding she did not prove (1) the nature of her preexisting disabilities by a preponderance of…”
Robert March v. Treasurer of the State of Missouri - Custodian of the Second Injury Fund (Mo. 2022). “5 Section 287.808 places “[t]he burden of proving an entitlement to compensation … on the employee ….”
Ruby Rasa v. Treasurer of The State of Missouri-Custodian of the Second Injury Fund, 474 S.W.3d 572 (Mo. Ct. App. 2015). “§ 287.808, RSMo Supp. 2014. To prove that she was entitled to partial permanent disability benefits from SIF, Rasa therefore bore the burden of demonstrating: (1) that she suffered from a preexisting permanent partial disability “of such seriousness as to constitute a hindrance…”
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.