Section 213
- Citation
- Section 213
- Parent Document
- Vermett v. State, 544 S.W.3d 294 (2018)
- Jurisdiction
- Missouri (state)
- Effective Date
- 2018-02-27
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6241359/vermett-v-state/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (39)
- Vermett v. State, 544 S.W.3d 294 (2018)
- Vermett v. State, 544 S.W.3d 294 (2018)
- Vermett v. State, 544 S.W.3d 294 (2018)
- Vermett v. State, 544 S.W.3d 294 (2018)
- Vermett v. State, 544 S.W.3d 294 (2018)
- Vermett v. State, 544 S.W.3d 294 (2018)
- Vermett v. State, 544 S.W.3d 294 (2018)
- Vermett v. State, 544 S.W.3d 294 (2018)
- Vermett v. State, 544 S.W.3d 294 (2018)
- Vermett v. State, 544 S.W.3d 294 (2018)
- Vermett v. State, 544 S.W.3d 294 (2018)
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
- Section 213
Full Text
558 charsIn Appellants' second point, they argue that the MCHR's determination of damages was not supported by competent and substantial evidence upon the whole record. Specifically, Appellants assert that the awarded damages do not equal Respondents' actual damages and that the damages awarded should have been reduced because of Appellants' efforts to accommodate Respondents. Appellants also contend that their conduct was not so egregious as to trigger the public interest provision permitting the MCHR to order Appellants to pay a civil penalty of up to $2,000.