Mathis v. ST. LOUIS COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT

84 S.W.3d 524, 2002 WL 31085827
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedSeptember 10, 2002
DocketED 81492
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 84 S.W.3d 524 (Mathis v. ST. LOUIS COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT) 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
Mathis v. ST. LOUIS COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT, 84 S.W.3d 524, 2002 WL 31085827 (Mo. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, Presiding Judge.

Lisa Mathis, claimant, filed an appeal from the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission affirming the decision of the Appeals Tribunal, which disqualified her from receiving unemployment benefits. The Division of Employment Security, respondent, filed a motion *525 to dismiss the appeal as untimely. We agree and dismiss the appeal.

The right of appeal is purely statutory and where statutes do not give such a right, no appeal exists. Labrier v. Anheuser Ford, Inc., 621 S.W.2d 51, 53 (Mo. banc 1981). Under section 288.210, RSMo 2000, the notice of appeal to this court was due within twenty (20) days after the decision of the Commission became final. The decision of the Commission became final ten (10) days after the date of mailing of the decision to the parties. Section 288.200.2, RSMo 2000.

Here, the Secretary of the Commission mailed its decision to claimant on June 14, 2002. The decision became final ten days later on June 24, 2002. Claimant’s notice of appeal was due twenty days thereafter on Monday, July 15, 2002. Section 288.240, RSMo 2000. Claimant’s notice of appeal filed on July 16, 2002 is untimely. Moreover, there is no mechanism under section 288.210 to seek a special order to file a late notice of appeal. Phillips v. Clean-Tech, 34 S.W.3d 854, 855 (Mo.App.E.D.2000).

The procedures outlined for appeal by statute in unemployment security cases are mandatory and an untimely appeal divests this Court of jurisdiction to entertain claimant’s appeal. Burch Food Services, Inc. v. Missouri Div. Of Employment Sec., 945 S.W.2d 478, 481 (Mo.App. W.D.1997). Appeal dismissed for lack of a timely notice of appeal.

LAWRENCE G. CRAHAN and ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., JJ.

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

Related

M. THOMAS v. St. Martin's Childcare Center
127 S.W.3d 704 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2004)
Zahradka v. Northwest Chrsyler-Plymouth, Inc.
122 S.W.3d 729 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2003)
Loeffler v. Shop N Save
121 S.W.3d 261 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2003)
Miller v. Rigsby's Professional Hair-Cutters, Inc.
122 S.W.3d 594 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2003)
Slaughter v. CCG Enterprises, Inc.
116 S.W.3d 706 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2003)
Potts v. Council for Extended Care of Mentally Retarded Citizens
109 S.W.3d 228 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2003)
Daniels v. Colonial Care Center
109 S.W.3d 229 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2003)
Eggering v. Delmar Gardens Enterprises, Inc.
105 S.W.3d 853 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2003)
Williams v. ESI Mail Pharmacy Service, Inc.
103 S.W.3d 848 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2003)
Williams v. Lutheran Senior Services
103 S.W.3d 849 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2003)
Bass v. Yong Min Kim
101 S.W.3d 333 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2003)
West v. Integral Properties, LLC
101 S.W.3d 340 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2003)
Roberts v. Colonial Meadows, LLC
97 S.W.3d 529 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2003)
Poole v. Adecco North America L.L.C.
93 S.W.3d 850 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
84 S.W.3d 524, 2002 WL 31085827, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mathis-v-st-louis-county-health-department-moctapp-2002.