Bonds v. WHITE CASTLE SYSTEM, INC.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Bonds v. WHITE CASTLE SYSTEM, INC.

286 S.W.3d 870, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1053, 2009 WL 2015111

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJuly 14, 2009

DocketED 93014

StatusPublished

This text of 286 S.W.3d 870 (Bonds v. WHITE CASTLE SYSTEM, INC.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bonds v. WHITE CASTLE SYSTEM, INC., 286 S.W.3d 870, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1053, 2009 WL 2015111 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

KENNETH M. ROMINES, Chief Judge.

Danyell Bonds (Claimant) appeals the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission’s (Commission) decision concerning *871 her application for unemployment benefits. We dismiss the appeal.

A deputy of the Division of Employment Security (Division) concluded that Claimant was ineligible for unemployment benefits, because her employer discharged her for misconduct connected with her work. She filed an appeal to the Appeals Tribunal, which affirmed the deputy’s determination. Claimant then sought review with the Commission, which affirmed the Appeals Tribunal’s decision. Claimant appeals to this Court. The Division has filed a motion to dismiss Claimant’s appeal, asserting it is untimely. Claimant has not filed a response to the motion.

In unemployment matters, the notice of appeal to this Court must be filed within twenty days of the Commission’s decision becoming final. Section 288.210, RSMo 2000. The Commission’s decision becomes final ten days after it is mailed to the parties. Section 288.200.2, RSMo 2000.

Here, the Commission mailed its decision to Claimant on April 7, 2009. Therefore, the notice of appeal to this Court was due on or before May 7, 2009. Sections 288.200.2, 288.210. Claimant mailed her notice of appeal to the Commission in an envelope with a postmark of May 8, 2009, which is deemed the date of the filing of the notice of appeal. Section 288.240, RSMo 2000. Claimant’s notice of appeal is untimely.

“Section 288.200 RSMo does not provide for late filing and does not recognize any exceptions for filing out of time.” McCuin Phillips v. Clean-Tech, 34 S.W.3d 854, 855 (Mo.App. E.D.2000). As a result, an untimely notice of appeal deprives this Court of jurisdiction to entertain the appeal and we must dismiss it. Brandy v. Division of Employment Sec., 271 S.W.3d 54 (Mo.App. E.D.2008).

The Division’s motion to dismiss is granted. The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

NANNETTE A. BAKER and ROY L. RICHTER, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

KENNETH M. ROMINES, Chief Judge.

Danyell Bonds (Claimant) appeals the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission’s (Commission) decision concerning *871 her application for unemployment benefits. We dismiss the appeal.

A deputy of the Division of Employment Security (Division) concluded that Claimant was ineligible for unemployment benefits, because her employer discharged her for misconduct connected with her work. She filed an appeal to the Appeals Tribunal, which affirmed the deputy’s determination. Claimant then sought review with the Commission, which affirmed the Appeals Tribunal’s decision. Claimant appeals to this Court. The Division has filed a motion to dismiss Claimant’s appeal, asserting it is untimely. Claimant has not filed a response to the motion.

In unemployment matters, the notice of appeal to this Court must be filed within twenty days of the Commission’s decision becoming final. Section 288.210, RSMo 2000. The Commission’s decision becomes final ten days after it is mailed to the parties. Section 288.200.2, RSMo 2000.

Here, the Commission mailed its decision to Claimant on April 7, 2009. Therefore, the notice of appeal to this Court was due on or before May 7, 2009. Sections 288.200.2, 288.210. Claimant mailed her notice of appeal to the Commission in an envelope with a postmark of May 8, 2009, which is deemed the date of the filing of the notice of appeal. Section 288.240, RSMo 2000. Claimant’s notice of appeal is untimely.

“Section 288.200 RSMo does not provide for late filing and does not recognize any exceptions for filing out of time.” McCuin Phillips v. Clean-Tech, 34 S.W.3d 854, 855 (Mo.App. E.D.2000). As a result, an untimely notice of appeal deprives this Court of jurisdiction to entertain the appeal and we must dismiss it. Brandy v. Division of Employment Sec., 271 S.W.3d 54 (Mo.App. E.D.2008).

The Division’s motion to dismiss is granted. The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

NANNETTE A. BAKER and ROY L. RICHTER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

286 S.W.3d 870, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1053, 2009 WL 2015111, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bonds-v-white-castle-system-inc-moctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack