Skip to content
Ott Law Firm

James May, Employee-Appellant, v. St. Louis Community College, Employer-Respondent, and Treasurer of the State of Missouri, as Custodian for the Second Injury Fund, Respondent.

Decision date: Unknown

Parties & Roles

Disposition

Affirmed

Slip Opinion Notice

This archive contains Missouri appellate slip opinions reproduced for research convenience, not the final official reporter version. Official source links remain authoritative where provided. Joseph Ott, Attorney 67889, Ott Law Firm - Constant Victory - Personal Injury and Litigation maintains these public legal archives to support Missouri case research and to help prospective clients connect that research to the firm's courtroom practice.

Related Legal Help

Researching a similar employment law issue?

This archive page is for legal research. For a practical overview of claims, deadlines, evidence, and next steps, start with the related practice page.

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: James May, Employee-Appellant, v. St. Louis Community College, Employer-Respondent, and Treasurer of the State of Missouri, as Custodian for the Second Injury Fund, Respondent. Case Number: 72398 Handdown Date: 11/25/1997 Appeal From: Labor and Industrial Relations Commission Counsel for Appellant: Harry Nichols Counsel for Respondent: Raymond J. Flunker, Jeffrey M. Proske & Jay Nixon Opinion Summary: None Citation: Opinion Author: PER CURIAM Opinion Vote: AFFIRMED. Ahrens, P.J., Crandall, Jr., and Karohl, JJ., concur. Opinion: The awards of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission are affirmed. The evidence, reviewed in a light most favorable to the award, contains competent and substantial evidence to support the awards. Particularly, there was evidence to support a finding claimant did not sustain compensable injuries on December 2, 1992, and January 16, 1993. No jurispurdential purpose would be served by an extended opinion. We affirm. Rule 84.16(b). Separate Opinion: None This slip opinion is subject to revision and may not reflect the final opinion adopted by the Court.

Authorities Cited

Statutes, rules, and cases referenced in this opinion.

Rules

Related Opinions

Other opinions in the same practice area.

Kathryn Torre-Stewart, Appellant/Plaintiff, v. The Washington University-St. Louis, Respondent/Defendant.(2026)

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern DistrictFebruary 24, 2026#ED113602

affirmed

The court affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff's disability discrimination and hostile work environment claims under the Missouri Human Rights Act because she failed to plead facts demonstrating legal disability or a hostile work environment based on disability. However, the court reversed and remanded the retaliation claim, finding that plaintiff alleged sufficient facts establishing the elements of retaliation under the Act based on her complaints of disability discrimination.

Read The Employment Law GuideGuide
Civil Litigationper_curiam7,351 words
Read opinion