Moreland v. Division of Employment Sec., WD 69023.
| Court | Court of Appeal of Missouri (US) |
| Citation | 273 S.W.3d 39 |
| Docket Number | No. WD 69023.,WD 69023. |
| Parties | William MORELAND, Appellant, v. DIVISION OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, Respondent. |
| Decision Date | 14 October 2008 |
v.
DIVISION OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, Respondent.
[273 S.W.3d 40]
William Moreland, Kansas City, MO, pro se.
Shelly Kintzel, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.
Before THOMAS H. NEWTON, C.J., VICTOR C. HOWARD and ALOK AHUJA, JJ.
ALOK AHUJA, Judge.
Appellant William Moreland appeals from a decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission denying his application for unemployment benefits. The Commission denied Mr. Moreland's application on the ground that he was not an "insured worker" within the meaning of § 288.030.1(22), RSMo 2000, and therefore was not eligible for benefits. Because of the significant deficiencies in Mr. Moreland's appellate brief, we dismiss the appeal without reaching the merits of the Commission's benefits determination.
In an order entered on April 17, 2008, this Court struck Mr. Moreland's initial brief based on multiple, specifically identified violations of the briefing requirements of Rule 84.04. We gave Mr. Moreland the opportunity to file an Amended Brief curing the listed deficiencies. Yet Mr. Moreland's Amended Brief continues to suffer from the same significant defects identified in this Court's April 17 Order. Thus, without attempting to be exhaustive, his Amended Brief (like his original Brief) contains: no table of contents or table of
cases, in violation of Rule 84.04(a)(1); no Jurisdictional Statement, in violation of Rules 84.04(a)(2) and (b); no fact statement with citations to the record (and no record citations anywhere) in violation of Rules 84.04(c) and (i); no Points Relied On, in violation of Rules 84.04(a)(4) and (d); no legal argument with citation of relevant authority applicable to the issues on appeal, in violation of Rules 84.04(a)(5) and (e); no identification of the appropriate standard of review, in violation of Rule 84.04(e); and no "short conclusion stating the precise relief sought," in violation of Rule 84.04(a)(6).1
At the outset we emphasize that, although Mr. Moreland is appealing pro se, "he is subject to the same procedural rules as parties represented by counsel, including the rules specifying the required contents of appellate briefs." Rainey v. SSPS, Inc., 259 S.W.3d 603, 603 (Mo.App. W.D.2008) (citing Sy v. Sow, 258 S.W.3d 840 (Mo.App. W.D.2008)).
Mr. Moreland's failure to include a fact statement with record references, Points Relied On, and a legal argument citing authority (with an explanation of how the cited authority applies here) would each be a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Schnurbusch v. W. Plains Reg'l Animal Shelter, SD 35385
...Constr. Co. , 870 S.W.2d 494, 498 (Mo. App. 1994) ). We cannot craft that argument on their behalf. See Moreland v. Div. of Emp't Sec. , 273 S.W.3d 39, 42 (Mo. App. 2008). Without any argument purporting to demonstrate how the trial court abused its discretion, the Schnurbusches cannot succ......
-
Schnurbusch v. W. Plains Reg'l Animal Shelter, SD35385
...Constr. Co., 870 S.W.2d 494, 498 (Mo.App. 1994)). We cannot craft that argument on their behalf. See Moreland v. Div. of Emp't Sec., 273 S.W.3d 39, 42 (Mo. App. 2008). Without any argument purporting to demonstrate how the trial court abused its discretion, the Schnurbusches cannot succeed ......
-
In re Mitchell, SD 34821
...level of manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice. We cannot craft that argument on his behalf. Moreland v. Div. of Employment Sec. , 273 S.W.3d 39, 42 (Mo. App. 2008). In the absence of such an argument, we are not generally inclined to, and will not in this case, exercise our discreti......
-
Yates v. Briggs & Stratton, SD 29825.
...statement of the grounds upon which this Court's jurisdiction is invoked. Rule 84.04(a)(2); Moreland v. Division of Employment Sec., 273 S.W.3d 39, 41 (Mo.App. Third, the statement of facts does not contain "a fair and concise statement of the facts relevant to the questions presented for d......