Beaman v. Lowe's Home Ctrs., Inc.

Full title: GINA BEAMAN, Appellant, v. LOWE'S HOME CENTERS, INC., Respondent.

Court: Missouri Court of Appeals Southern District Division Two

Date published: Jun 23, 2020

601 S.W.3d 330 (Mo. Ct. App. 2020)

Opinion

No. SD 36473

06-23-2020

Gina BEAMAN, Appellant, v. LOWE'S HOME CENTERS, INC., Respondent.

Attorney for Appellant – RYAN E. MURPHY, Springfield, MO. Attorney for Respondent – JOHN S. DOLENCE, Webb City, MO.

MARY W. SHEFFIELD, J.

Attorney for Appellant – RYAN E. MURPHY, Springfield, MO.

Attorney for Respondent – JOHN S. DOLENCE, Webb City, MO.

MARY W. SHEFFIELD, J. Gina Beaman lost a workers' compensation claim for failure to carry her burden of proof. She appeals, charging in each of six points that "there was not sufficient competent evidence" to support a decision against her. See § 287.495.1(4), RSMo. (2000)¹

1 Harmonized with the constitutional standard ("supported by competent and substantial evidence[,]" Mo. Const. art. V, § 18 ) in Hampton v. Big Boy Steel Erection , 121 S.W.3d 220, 222 (Mo. banc 2003).
--------

Only factual findings needed to make an award for the employee need evidentiary support. Annayeva v. SAB of TSD of City of St. Louis , 597 S.W.3d 196, 200 n.8 (Mo. banc 2020). This tracks a basic precept – no evidence is needed to find against the party who bore the burden of proof or to uphold that decision on appeal. See, e.g. , Taylor v. Taylor , 585 S.W.3d 390, 395 & n.5 (Mo. App. S.D. 2019).

Offering no cognizable legal basis for reversal, Beaman's § 287.495.1(4) complaints fail without further discussion or analysis. See Guinn v. Treasurer , No. SD36380, 600 S.W.3d 874, 880 (Mo. App. S.D. May 4, 2020). We reject all points and affirm the denial of benefits.

DANIEL E. SCOTT, P.J. – CONCURS

DON E. BURRELL, J. – CONCURS