Ott Law Firm Agent-Safe Plain Text
Official source remains authoritative.

Case: Gary Klosterhoff, Appellant, v. Heilig-Meyers Furniture and Division of Employment Security, Respondents.
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District
Decision Date: Unknown
Outcome: affirmed
Practice Area: employment
Canonical URL: https://ott.law/missouri-courts/opinions/gary-klosterhoff-appellant-v-heilig-meyers-furniture-and-division-of-empl-17490
Official Source URL: https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=17490
Related Practice Areas:
- Employment Law: https://ott.law/practice-areas/employment?ott_archive=missouri-courts&ott_archive_practice_area=employment&ott_archive_query=Gary+Klosterhoff%2C+Appellant%2C+v.+Heilig-Meyers+Furniture+and+Division+of+Employment+Security%2C+Respondents.&ott_archive_link_source=tag&ott_archive_link_score=26&ott_archive_link_evidence=tag%3A+employment%3B+text%3A+employment&ott_archive_location=opinion_plain_text_practice_area (slug: employment; source: tag; score: 26; evidence: tag: employment, text: employment)

---
## Opinion

This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.
Opinion
Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District
Case Style:  Gary Klosterhoff, Appellant, v. Heilig-Meyers Furniture and Division of Employment Security, 
Respondents.
Case Number:  No. 71958
Handdown Date:  06/24/1997
Appeal From:  Labor and Industrial Relations Commission
Counsel for Appellant: 
Counsel for Respondent: 
Opinion Summary: 
Citation: 
Opinion Author:  Per Curiam
Opinion Vote:  AFFIRMED.  Before Dowd, Jr., P.J., Reinhard, and Gaertner, JJ.
Opinion:
O R D E R
Appellant,   Gary   Klosterhoff   ("claimant"),   appeals   the   Final  Award   of   the   Labor   and   Industrial   Relations 
Commission ("Commission") denying his claim for unemployment benefits until claimant earned sufficient wages where 
claimant voluntarily left his employment without good cause attributable to his work or employer, respondent Heilig-
Meyers Furniture.  We affirm.
We have read the briefs of the parties and have reviewed the legal file and find the Final Award of the 
Commission is supported by competent and substantial evidence and no error of law appears.  As we further find no 
jurisprudential purpose would be served by an extended opinion, we affirm the Commission's award pursuant to Rule 

84.16(b).
Separate Opinion:
This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.