Sokol v. Labor & Industrial Relations Commission of Missouri
Missouri Court of Appeals
1DissentLowenstein, Judge
Bad facts in a case can lead an appellate court to strain to attempt to do what it feels to be “the right thing.” The fact that the employer’s conduct here was shabby in its method of changing the contract with Sokol, does not change or negate eligibility require-*29mente of a worker under Missouri’s unemployment compensation law so as to bestow benefits in this case. For all the rhetoric and logic put forth either in the court’s opinion, or in this dissent, this case will now be the common law in Missouri, and will stand for the following proposition: an employment contract, terminable by…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Haynes v. Unemployment Compensation CommissionSupreme Court of Missouri · 1944
- Producers Produce Co. v. Industrial Commission of Missouri Division of Employment SecuritySupreme Court of Missouri · 1956
- Belle State Bank v. Industrial Commission, Division of Employment SecurityMissouri Court of Appeals · 1977
- Hessler v. Labor & Industrial Relations CommissionSupreme Court of Missouri · 1993
- Citizens Bank of Shelbyville v. Industrial CommissionMissouri Court of Appeals · 1968
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.