Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Quik ‘N Tasty Foods, Inc. v. Division of Employment Security

Missouri Court of Appeals
17 S.W.3d 620 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000)


Facts

Wendy Foley was a machine operator for Quik ‘N Tasty Foods, Inc. (Quik ‘N Tasty) (plaintiff) for approximately three years. On March 24, 1999, Foley was called into the office of her immediate supervisor, Tina James, to address Foley’s excessive absences. During the meeting, Foley said that she needed to take the day off on March 29, 1999, in order to take her children to the dentist. James informed Foley that taking the day off would be unacceptable. James suggested that Foley consider resigning, rather than risk having a termination on her employment record. James did not affirmatively state that Foley would be discharged if she did not resign, or that Foley would be discharged if she did not work on March 29. After the meeting, Foley submitted her resignation. On March 29, Foley filed for unemployment benefits with the Missouri Division of Employment Security (Division) (defendant). The Division concluded that Foley was ineligible for unemployment benefits because she had resigned voluntarily without good cause attributable to her work or her employer. Foley appealed. An appeals referee found that Foley’s decision to resign was unreasonable and not in good faith, and that Foley was therefore not qualified for unemployment benefits. Foley appealed to the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission). The Commission reversed, finding that Foley’s resignation was reasonable, that her resignation was in good faith, and that Foley was entitled to unemployment benefits. Quik ‘N Tasty appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Holliger, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.