Flotron v. Information Solutions Design

Missouri Court of Appeals

Flotron v. Information Solutions Design

238 S.W.3d 745, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1561, 2007 WL 3342064

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 13, 2007

DocketED 90325

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 238 S.W.3d 745 (Flotron v. Information Solutions Design) 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

Flotron v. Information Solutions Design, 238 S.W.3d 745, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1561, 2007 WL 3342064 (Mo. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

PATRICIA L. COHEN, Chief Judge.

Paul Flotron (Claimant) appeals from the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) affirming the denial of his application for unemployment benefits. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

A deputy of the Division of Employment Security concluded that Claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits. Claimant appealed this decision to the Appeals Tribunal of the Division, which affirmed the deputy’s determination. Claimant then filed an application for review with the Commission. The Commission affirmed the Appeals Tribunal’s decision. Claimant has now appealed to this Court.

The Division has filed a motion to dismiss Claimant’s appeal. The Division asserts that Claimant’s notice of appeal to this Court is untimely. As a result, the Division asserts that this Court lacks jurisdiction to review the case. Claimant has not filed a response.

Section 288.210, RSMo 2000, requires that in unemployment cases, a claimant must file the notice of appeal to this Court from the Commission’s decision within twenty days of the decision becoming final. 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 August 21, 2007. Therefore, the notice of appeal was due on September 20, 2007. Sections 288.200.2, 288.210. Claimant mailed his notice of appeal to the Commission in an envelope postmarked September 24, 2007, and it is deemed filed on that date. Section 288.240, RSMo 2000. The notice of appeal is untimely.

Chapter 288 governing unemployment cases fails to provide for the fifing of a late notice of appeal. 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. Curry v. Graybar Elec. Co., Inc., 211 S.W.3d 644, 645 (Mo.App. E.D. 2007).

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

BOOKER T. SHAW and NANNETTE A. BAKER, JJ., Concur.

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

PATRICIA L. COHEN, Chief Judge.

Paul Flotron (Claimant) appeals from the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission (Commission) affirming the denial of his application for unemployment benefits. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

A deputy of the Division of Employment Security concluded that Claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits. Claimant appealed this decision to the Appeals Tribunal of the Division, which affirmed the deputy’s determination. Claimant then filed an application for review with the Commission. The Commission affirmed the Appeals Tribunal’s decision. Claimant has now appealed to this Court.

The Division has filed a motion to dismiss Claimant’s appeal. The Division asserts that Claimant’s notice of appeal to this Court is untimely. As a result, the Division asserts that this Court lacks jurisdiction to review the case. Claimant has not filed a response.

Section 288.210, RSMo 2000, requires that in unemployment cases, a claimant must file the notice of appeal to this Court from the Commission’s decision within twenty days of the decision becoming final. 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 August 21, 2007. Therefore, the notice of appeal was due on September 20, 2007. Sections 288.200.2, 288.210. Claimant mailed his notice of appeal to the Commission in an envelope postmarked September 24, 2007, and it is deemed filed on that date. Section 288.240, RSMo 2000. The notice of appeal is untimely.

Chapter 288 governing unemployment cases fails to provide for the fifing of a late notice of appeal. 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. Curry v. Graybar Elec. Co., Inc., 211 S.W.3d 644, 645 (Mo.App. E.D. 2007).

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

BOOKER T. SHAW and NANNETTE A. BAKER, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

238 S.W.3d 745, 2007 Mo. App. LEXIS 1561, 2007 WL 3342064, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flotron-v-information-solutions-design-moctapp-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack