Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 288.190 (2026)

Administrative appeals on disputed determinations

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

288.190. Administrative appeals on disputed determinations — party subject to appeal decision, right to counsel. — 1. The director shall designate an impartial referee or referees to hear and decide disputed determinations, claims referred pursuant to subsection 2 of section 288.070, and petitions for reassessment. No employee of the division shall participate on behalf of the division in any case in which the division employee is an interested party.

2. The manner in which disputed determinations, referred claims, and petitions for reassessment shall be presented and the conduct of hearings shall be in accordance with regulations prescribed by the division for determining the rights of the parties, whether or not such regulations conform to common law or statutory rules of evidence and other technical rules of procedure. When the same or substantially similar evidence is relevant and material to the matters in issue in claims by more than one individual or in claims by a single individual in respect to two or more weeks of unemployment, the same time and place for considering each such claim or claims may be fixed, hearings thereon jointly conducted, a single record of the proceedings made, and evidence introduced with respect to one proceeding considered as introduced in the others, if in the judgment of the appeals tribunal or the commission having jurisdiction of the proceeding such consolidation would not be prejudicial to any party. A full and complete record shall be kept of all proceedings in connection with a disputed determination, referred claim, or petition for reassessment. The appeals tribunal shall include in the record and consider as evidence all records of the division that are material to the issues. All testimony at any hearing shall be recorded but need not be transcribed unless the matter is further appealed.

3. Unless an appeal on a disputed determination or referred claim is withdrawn, an appeals tribunal, after affording the parties reasonable opportunity for fair hearing, shall affirm, modify, or reverse the determination of the deputy, or shall remand the matter to the deputy with directions. In addition, in any case wherein the appellant, after having been duly notified of the date, time, and place of the hearing, shall fail to appear at such hearing, the appeals tribunal may enter an order dismissing the appeal. The director may transfer to another appeals tribunal the proceedings on an appeal determination before an appeals tribunal. The parties shall be duly notified of an appeals tribunal's decision or order, together with its reason therefor, which shall be deemed to be the final decision or order of the division unless, within thirty days after the date of notification or mailing of such decision, further appeal is initiated pursuant to section 288.200; except that, within thirty days of either notification or mailing of the appeals tribunal's decision or order, the appeals tribunal, on its own motion, or on motion of any party to the case, may reconsider any decision or order when it appears that such reconsideration is essential to the accomplishment of the object and purpose of this law. The authority of the appeals tribunal to reconsider any decision or order under this section shall continue throughout the thirty-day time limit, regardless of whether any party has initiated further appeal under section 288.200 during the thirty-day period.

4. Unless a petition for reassessment is withdrawn or is allowed without a hearing, the petitioners shall be given a reasonable opportunity for a fair hearing before an appeals tribunal upon each such petition. The appeals tribunal shall promptly notify the interested parties of its decision upon such petition together with its reason therefor. In addition, in any case wherein the appellant, after having been duly notified of the date, time, and place of the hearing, shall fail to appear at such hearing, the appeals tribunal may enter an order dismissing the appeal. In the absence of the filing of an application for review of such decision, the decision, whether it results in a reassessment or otherwise, shall become final thirty days after the date of notification or mailing thereof; except that, within thirty days of either notification or mailing of the appeals tribunal's decision or order, the appeals tribunal, on its own motion, or on motion of any party to the case, may reconsider any decision or order when it appears that such reconsideration is essential to the accomplishment of the object and purposes of this law. The authority of the appeals tribunal to reconsider any decision under this section shall continue throughout the thirty-day time limit, regardless of whether any party has initiated further appeal under section 288.200 during that thirty-day period.

5. Any party subject to any decision of an appeals tribunal pursuant to this chapter has a right to counsel and shall be notified prior to a hearing conducted pursuant to this chapter that a decision of the appeals tribunal is presumptively conclusive for the purposes of this chapter as provided in section 288.200.

--------

(L. 1951 p. 564 § 288.160, A.L. 1972 S.B. 473, A.L. 1979 S.B. 477, A.L. 1984 H.B. 1251 & 1549, A.L. 1996 H.B. 1368, A.L. 2006 H.B. 1456)

Effective 10-01-06

(1962) When it was stipulated by counsel with referee that certain evidence previously heard in some prior proceedings would be applicable to and considered in proceedings on claim for benefits, no part of which was made part of the record, neither the appeals tribunal, the commission, nor the circuit court could have rendered a decision authorized by law and the cause was remanded. Gidley v. Industrial Commission (A.), 356 S.W.2d 550.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 37 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1955–2024 · leading case: Bresnahan v. May Dep't Stores Co., 726 S.W.2d 327 (Mo. 1987).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Bresnahan v. May Dep't Stores Co., 726 S.W.2d 327 (Mo. 1987). · cites it 12× “Section 288.190, RSMo 1986. Because of the need for a prompt adjudication of eligibility, the policy of the law is that these proceedings be expedited.”

Producers Produce Co. v. Indus. Comm'n of Missouri Div. of Emp. Sec., 291 S.W.2d 166 (Mo. 1956). · cites it 9× “Section 288.190 RSMo 1949, amended Laws 1951, p.”

Jackson-Mughal v. Div. of Emp. Sec., 359 S.W.3d 97 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 7× “This rule implements section 288.190, RSMo. (1) The provisions of this chapter will apply to any appeal, petition for reassessment or other type of request for hearing conducted by an appeals tribunal unless specifically provided otherwise by state or federal law or regulation.”

Crawford v. Div. of Emp. Sec., 376 S.W.3d 658 (Mo. 2012). · cites it 2× “of a lack of knowledge of material fact on the part of the division, has received any sum of benefits pursuant to this chapter while any conditions for the receipt of benefits imposed by this chapter were not fulfilled in such person’s case, or while such person was disqualified…”

Harris v. Div. of Emp. Sec., 292 S.W.3d 416 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 4× “of a lack of knowledge of material fact on the part of the division, has received any sum of benefits pursuant to this chapter while any conditions for the receipt of benefits imposed by this chapter were not fulfilled in such person's case, or while such person was disqualified…”

Campbell v. Labor & Indus. Relations Comm'n, 907 S.W.2d 246 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “r omission or because of a lack of knowledge of material fact on the part of the division, has received any sum as benefits under this law while any conditions for the receipt of benefits imposed by this law were not fulfilled in his case, or while he was disqualified from…”

Lester E. Cox Med. Ctr. v. Labor & Indus. Relations Comm'n, 606 S.W.2d 427 (Mo. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 5× “Each claim was appealed as provided by § 288.190, RSMo (Supp.1975); in each case review of the decision of the appeals tribunal was sought by the former employer.”

Bussmann Mfg. Co. v. Indus. Comm'n of Missouri, 327 S.W.2d 487 (Mo. Ct. App. 1959). · cites it 3× “” Appellant filed its appeal and a hearing was had before an Appeals Tribunal as provided by Section 288.190 RSMo 1949, V.A.M.S., which entered its decision *489 affirming the claims deputy.”

Lusher v. Gerald Harris Constr., Inc., 993 S.W.2d 537 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “indicating that no voluntary quitting occurred but that Lusher was discharged; and 3) the Commission erred in adopting the underlying decision of the appeals tribunal as its own because the appeals tribunal failed to follow the specific requirements of the Division in conducting…”

Greater Kansas City Baptist & Cmty. Hosp. Ass'n v. Div. of Emp. Sec., Dep't of Labor & Indus. Relations, 583 S.W.2d 247 (Mo. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 3× “Plaintiff did not seek the evidentiary hearing on the assessment as provided by Section 288.190 RSMo. As a consequence none of the provisions for review in the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission under Section 288,200 RSMo, and subsequently in the counts under Section 288.”

Div. of Emp. Sec. v. Cusumano, 809 S.W.2d 113 (Mo. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 3× “Section 288.190, RSMo 1978. If still dissatisfied she could have taken an appeal to the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission.”

Byers v. Human Resource Staffing, LLC, 402 S.W.3d 605 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “who, by reason of any error or omission or because of a lack of knowledge of material fact on the part of the division, has received any sum of benefits pursuant to this chapter while any conditions for the receipt of benefits imposed by this chapter were not fulfilled in such…”

Show all 37 citing cases →

— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 288.190(2) — 2 cases

Lester E. Cox Med. Ctr. v. Labor & Indus. Relations Comm'n, 606 S.W.2d 427 (Mo. Ct. App. 1980). “Each claim was appealed as provided by § 288.190, RSMo (Supp.1975); in each case review of the decision of the appeals tribunal was sought by the former employer.”

Crawford v. Indus. Comm'n, 482 S.W.2d 739 (Mo. Ct. App. 1972).

— Mo. Rev. Stat. § 288.190(3) — 1 case

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.