Morris v. PREFERRED MEAL SYSTEMS, INC.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Morris v. PREFERRED MEAL SYSTEMS, INC.

328 S.W.3d 713, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1527, 2010 WL 5368319

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 9, 2010

DocketED 95428

StatusPublished

This text of 328 S.W.3d 713 (Morris v. PREFERRED MEAL SYSTEMS, 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

Morris v. PREFERRED MEAL SYSTEMS, INC., 328 S.W.3d 713, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1527, 2010 WL 5368319 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

ROY L. RICHTER, Chief Judge.

Ronald Morris (Claimant) appeals the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission’s (Commission) decision denying his 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. Claimant appealed to the Appeals Tribunal, which dismissed his appeal. Claimant then filed an application for review with the Commission, which issued an order affirming the Appeals Tribunal’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.

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). Section 288.210, RSMo 2000, requires that an aggrieved party’s notice of appeal be filed with the Commission within twenty days after the decision of the Commission becomes final. The decision of the Commission becomes final ten days after the date of mailing of the decision to the parties. Section 288.200.2, RSMo 2000.

Here, the Commission mailed its decision to Claimant on July 12, 2010. Therefore, the notice of appeal to this Court was due on or before August 11, 2010. Sections 288.200.2, 288.210. Claimant faxed his notice of appeal to the Commission on August 30, 2010. As a result, Claimant’s notice of appeal is untimely under section 288.200. The unemployment statutes do not provide for the late filing of the notice of appeal and do 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). Therefore, our only recourse is to dismiss the appeal.

*714 The Division’s motion to dismiss is granted. The appeal is dismissed.

KURT S. ODENWALD and GARY M. GAERTNER, JR., JJ., concur.

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

ROY L. RICHTER, Chief Judge.

Ronald Morris (Claimant) appeals the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission’s (Commission) decision denying his 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. Claimant appealed to the Appeals Tribunal, which dismissed his appeal. Claimant then filed an application for review with the Commission, which issued an order affirming the Appeals Tribunal’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.

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). Section 288.210, RSMo 2000, requires that an aggrieved party’s notice of appeal be filed with the Commission within twenty days after the decision of the Commission becomes final. The decision of the Commission becomes final ten days after the date of mailing of the decision to the parties. Section 288.200.2, RSMo 2000.

Here, the Commission mailed its decision to Claimant on July 12, 2010. Therefore, the notice of appeal to this Court was due on or before August 11, 2010. Sections 288.200.2, 288.210. Claimant faxed his notice of appeal to the Commission on August 30, 2010. As a result, Claimant’s notice of appeal is untimely under section 288.200. The unemployment statutes do not provide for the late filing of the notice of appeal and do 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). Therefore, our only recourse is to dismiss the appeal.

*714 The Division’s motion to dismiss is granted. The appeal is dismissed.

KURT S. ODENWALD and GARY M. GAERTNER, JR., JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

328 S.W.3d 713, 2010 Mo. App. LEXIS 1527, 2010 WL 5368319, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morris-v-preferred-meal-systems-inc-moctapp-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack