Hamilton v. PLAZA TIRE SERVICE, INC.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Hamilton v. PLAZA TIRE SERVICE, INC.

262 S.W.3d 695, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 1236, 2008 WL 4131238

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 9, 2008

DocketED 91664

StatusPublished

This text of 262 S.W.3d 695 (Hamilton v. PLAZA TIRE SERVICE, 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

Hamilton v. PLAZA TIRE SERVICE, INC., 262 S.W.3d 695, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 1236, 2008 WL 4131238 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

NANNETTE A. BAKER, Chief Judge.

Marilyn Hamilton (Claimant) appeals the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission’s (Commission) decision affirming the denial of her unemployment benefits. The Division of Employment Security (Division) concluded that Claimant was ineligible for unemployment benefits. Claimant sought review at the Appeals Tribunal and the Commission, which both affirmed the Division’s decision. Claimant has now filed a notice of appeal 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.

Pursuant to section 288.210, RSMo 2000, an unemployment 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 June 20, 2008. Therefore, her notice of appeal was due on or before Monday, July 21, 2008. Sections 288.200.2, 288.210; 288.240, RSMo 2000. Claimant mailed her notice of appeal to the Commission on July 28, 2008. Section 288.240 provides that the notice of appeal is deemed filed as of the date endorsed by the United States post office on the envelope. Therefore, the notice of appeal was considered filed on July 28, 2008, which is untimely under section 288.210.

Chapter 288 governing unemployment cases fails to provide for the filing 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. Flotron v. Information Solutions Design, 238 S.W.3d 745, 746 (Mo.App. E.D.2007).

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

PATRICIA L. COHEN, J. and KENNETH M. ROMINES, J. concur.

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

NANNETTE A. BAKER, Chief Judge.

Marilyn Hamilton (Claimant) appeals the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission’s (Commission) decision affirming the denial of her unemployment benefits. The Division of Employment Security (Division) concluded that Claimant was ineligible for unemployment benefits. Claimant sought review at the Appeals Tribunal and the Commission, which both affirmed the Division’s decision. Claimant has now filed a notice of appeal 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.

Pursuant to section 288.210, RSMo 2000, an unemployment 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 June 20, 2008. Therefore, her notice of appeal was due on or before Monday, July 21, 2008. Sections 288.200.2, 288.210; 288.240, RSMo 2000. Claimant mailed her notice of appeal to the Commission on July 28, 2008. Section 288.240 provides that the notice of appeal is deemed filed as of the date endorsed by the United States post office on the envelope. Therefore, the notice of appeal was considered filed on July 28, 2008, which is untimely under section 288.210.

Chapter 288 governing unemployment cases fails to provide for the filing 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. Flotron v. Information Solutions Design, 238 S.W.3d 745, 746 (Mo.App. E.D.2007).

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

PATRICIA L. COHEN, J. and KENNETH M. ROMINES, J. concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

262 S.W.3d 695, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 1236, 2008 WL 4131238, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hamilton-v-plaza-tire-service-inc-moctapp-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack